Humanities desk
< December 31	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 2 >

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.

January 1

Irish in Los Angeles

Are there any Irish in Los Angeles? Heegoop, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Algebraist 00:41, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For example. Nyttend (talk) 05:09, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

..with such authentic Irish food!? 86.4.182.202 (talk) 08:36, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the girl on the cover of the Deftones' album Around the Fur?

Always wanted to know. Never got an answer. Perhaps you can help, Wikipedia?--Possiblereasons (talk) 05:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether her identity is public. In an interview with Revolver, the photographer Rick Kosick said

"They were having this after-hours party with all these chicks hanging out in the Ja***zi " ...

" I just happened to take a photo of a girl at, like 4 o'clock in the morning. I dont even know who she is - she was just a groupie, I think. I just saw her big tits and was like, Damn, I gotta photograph this." ...

"As Kosick remembers it, his subject wasn't too pleased at the time. " She was offended because I was in her personal space"...

" She made some comment about being too close to her boobs. So I took the photo, walked away, and never spoke to her again. I know they found her and got her to sign a release, though. " [1]

I did also see a blog mentioning some old win-a-signed-poster quiz contest where you had to answer nine questions, one of them being the one you asked. I found no answers though. I wouldn't be surprised if the model wished to remain anonymous. ---Sluzzelin talk 07:57, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name of Belgian village

I've posted a query on the Talk page for the Belgian town of Balen, seeking to clarify the identity and location of "Balen-Neet," a WWII-era village, and a possible alternate spelling, "Baelen-Nethe." Input would be appreciated -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 12:12, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like your Balen-Neet is actually closer to something like Balen-sur-Nethe and it simply means 'Old Balen.' Balen-sur-Nethe bears the same Lat/Long that Balen does (N 51° 10' 0" E 5° 9' 0"). In case you are wondering that location locally, maps I've located tend to show it lies nearly due East from Antwerp, Belgium. Hope that helps you out. Operator873 (talk) 12:44, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's more geographic detail than I'd expected! Is that a French source you cite? —as I'd expect a locale so near Antwerp would be named in Dutch (Flemish). The source document (undated) is monolingual, a Kaart van Eenzelvigheid en inschrijving in de bevolksingsregisters. -- Deborahjay (talk) 13:08, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'Old Balen' is not a translation of Balen-Neet, if that is what you meant to say Operator873, Balen-Neet is an old name of the town. It is located near the Grote Nete river, and Balen-sur-Nèthe means Balen-on-the-Nete. The website of the Balen municipality has a short history of the name of the town (here) from Baenle (13th century) to Baelen (15th century), Baelen aan de Nete (18th century), Balen-Neet and the present Balen. "Kaart van Eenzelvigheid en inschrijving in de bevolkingsregisters" means something like "identity card and proof of civil registration". 213.148.236.60 (talk) 13:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why does a small country like Denmark wish to remain outside the eurozone?

I can understand the reservations of the United Kingdom as it does have its own ties to its own interests, but if big European countries with much bigger populations than Denmark are content to join the Eurozone, why is it not in the zone? Opting out surely have a detrimental economic effect if big countries like Germany and France and the surrounding nations are content to join.

Also, why will it take so long for the countries in the former Soviet bloc to join the eurozone despite the fact that they've been members of the EU itself for quite a long time? And why do former Soviet bloc countries still lag behind Western Europe even today, twenty years after the fall of communism in Europe?--Possiblereasons (talk) 14:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As to 1: Denmark conducted a referendum in 2000 in which the populace decided against the introduction of the Euro. The topic is briefly dealt with in the article Denmark and the euro. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 15:32, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We Swedes also held a referendum about this issue, and rejected it as well. Personally, I always supported changing our currency to the Euro, so I can't speak in great detail to the motivations of the people who voted no (mostly because I think they're nuts, personally). However, as I remember it, most of the opposition to the Euro was based on, well, isolationism, basically. People wanted the Riksbank (our central bank, the oldest in the world, I might add) to set monetary policy, they didn't want to be ruled from Brussels and depend on the actions of the other eurozone countries (Sweden has always been a fairly isolationist country, we don't go to war, ally ourselves with any side in a war, and generally look at international unions with suspicion). I'm also guessing there was some understandable sentimental attachment to the Swedish krona, which you would expect. Belisarius (talk) 16:04, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Enlargement of the eurozone mentions that in Denmark a new referendum may be held in 2011 and the most recent poll suggested a majority of support for the Euro. However this was before the recent economic crisis and there's no telling how that would affect people's thinkings and in any case polls 3 years before the event aren't necessarily highly reliable. Sweden however doesn't have a majority supporting the Euro yet and no concencrete support for another referendum and indeed it may not happen until there is stable support in the polls. Again how the economic crisis will influence this remains to be seen Nil Einne (talk) 16:50, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One man's "isolationism" is another man's "declaration of independence" from foreign power. :) Wrad (talk) 17:20, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of the former Soviet bloc countries, most of them to want to join the Euroe. However many of them haven't fullfiled or are unable to fulfill the requirements. This is discussed in Enlargement of the eurozone on a case by case basis Nil Einne (talk) 16:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The main reason for any country to want to remain outside the euro zone is that joining the euro ends the independence of that country's central bank. That country then has to accept the monetary policy set by the European Central Bank, which it sets to meet the needs of the euro zone as a whole. Since the euro zone is dominated economically by Germany, France, and Italy, and to a lesser extent by Spain and the Netherlands, monetary policy set to address, say, stagnation deflation in Germany, Italy, and France would work to exacerbate asset price inflation in a smaller country. Spain and Ireland suffered from this adverse policy effect for several years, and it generated massive real estate bubbles in both countries that are now painfully deflating. Conversely, if there is a risk of inflation or economic overheating in the dominant economies of the euro zone, smaller economies dealing with an economic downturn could face a policy that would worsen that downturn.

Of course, there are countervailing reasons to join the euro zone nonetheless, but I won't go into those since the questioner wanted to know why Denmark chose to stay out. I will say that one big reason why Danes might have been hesitant to join the euro was that several years ago, the euro was a new currency and a financial experiment, since it was the first major transnational currency in history. Now that the euro has more or less proven not to be a disaster, and having seen a kindred small country (Iceland) damaged because its independent currency was vulnerable to financial trouble, Danes might find the relative security of the euro more appealing.

As for the eastern European members of the EU, the main reason that most have not joined the euro is that they have not yet met the convergence criteria. Marco polo (talk) 17:28, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One thing to keep in mind is that, while geographically stuck to Germany and the rest of continental Europe, Denmark is culturally and historically a Scandinavian country, along with Norway and Sweden (sometimes Finland and Iceland are included). I'd surmise that the surrounding countries that Denmark would most likely follow the lead of are Norway and Sweden, rather than Germany and France, at least culturally. (In fact, prior to WWI, the three countires had fixed exchange rate system with the Scandinavian Monetary Union.) Note that at this point neither Norway or Sweden are part of the Eurozone, and Norway and Iceland aren't even part of the European Union. The major reason Denmark, Sweden and Norway aren't part of the Eurozone/EU is because of referenda where the public have rejected joining. Unfortunately, I'm not familiar enough with Scandinavian culture to hazard a guess at why they're reluctant to join the EU/Eurozone. I will note that we have an article Denmark and the euro, which notes there are upcoming referenda for Denmark to join the eurozone-- 128.104.112.113 (talk) 18:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which continent is Turkey a part of?

I see some maps have it as part of Asia: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LocationEurope.png

And some maps show it as part of Europe: http://www.phrasebase.com/images/world_Europe.gif (http://www.phrasebase.com/countries/turkey/)

Which is accurate?

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.15.124.91 (talk) 17:10, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By an old convention, the southeastern edge of Europe is defined as the coastline running from the Black Sea along the Bosporus, the Sea of Marmara, and the Dardanelles to the Aegean Sea. By this definition, part of Turkey—East Thrace, including the historic core of Istanbul—belongs to Europe, while the rest—Anatolia—is part of Asia. So the country is part of both continents. Marco polo (talk) 17:15, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And a number of people reject the Europe/Asia continent split, and consider them part of the single continent of Eurasia. (So to them Turkey is part of Eurasia, with no ambiguity.) -- 128.104.112.113 (talk) 18:30, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The cultural borders are perhaps vague, with the being shared

Your first link http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LocationEurope.png actually follows the normal part-Europe and part-Asia convention (the European part is relatively small). Your second link has an equivalent url at http://www.phrasebase.com/images/world_Asia.gif which doesn't include the Arabian Peninsula, so it is very far from a normal division. Also note it is from a language site. The division was probably chosen to be pratical for the purpose of the site. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:13, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The definitions of where Europe ends and Asia begin (or vice-versa) are not entirely unambigous. User:Marco polo is correct in that it is common to talk about 'European part' and 'Asian part' of Turkey. However, the boundaries of Europe have shifted somewhat politically. Today it's increasingly common to identify Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan as European countries, opening up for a definition of Europe which would include Turkey as a whole. --Soman (talk) 15:44, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/22/LocationAsia.png has half Russia and half Turkey as Asian, as well as Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Cyprus. Greenland is in North America. This can, as you said, change tough, and it depends on the definition. For instance, much of Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan have Abrahamic religion and Indo-European languages as do European countries, but are regarded as exclusively Asian. Culturally speaking, Israel has strong ties to Europe. According to the article Enlargement of the European Union, Morocco applied (unsuccessfully) for European Union membership in 1987. Etc etc. Punkmorten (talk) 17:27, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think most of turkey is part of Asia and the most westeren area of turkey is part of Europe.--Apollonius 1236 (talk) 01:23, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Upazilas of Bangladesh

According to your article "Upazilas of Bangladesh", you wrote at present, there are total of 482 upazilas, but I did the counting of the upazilas and the total number is 467. Go to banglapedia.org for the information on each district of Bangladesh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.128.152 (talk) 17:30, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A comparison of Google searches on 482 Upazilas and 467 Upazilas supports the 482 in Upazilas of Bangladesh. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:26, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Children as domestic servants, marrying in 1880s Ohio

Yep, another of my queries after researching family history; since this involves law and society it goes here. Thanks for indulging these.

Anyway, we're trying to figure out an age for my great-great-grandmother. We know she - youngest of 11 kids - came w/her parents in 1873 to Canton, Ohio. We're pretty sure she's the one listed as a servant in another home in the 1880 census - everything else fits. (ONly one of that last name, which is a common one, etc.)

The confusion lies with her age; her age given means she was born about 1863/4 in the 1880 census, but the list for the boat she came over on says she was born "about 1867." Okay, if the person has to guess and she was smaller, I can understand that one. But, a newspaper article around her death lists her as 42 - which would make her 11 or 12 in the 1880 census. Furthermore, she married in 18883.

So, my question is, first, how common was it for children to be domestic servants in 1880s Ohio? The father had died in 1876 or so, so I can kind of see it. Second, did girls really marry that young in Ohio then? 14 seems normal for ancient times, or even the Middle Ages, but I'm not sure about the 1880s. (Unless, of course, she was pregnant, but her first child was born a year after the marriage. :-)

Funny thing is, the 1900 census seems to to corroborate the 1880 one as far as birthdate; so we *know* that's her, with the other family members as clues.Somebody or his brother (talk) 20:37, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If her father was dead, her mom may not have been able to provide for her, so she may have been teken into service by another family. This was not uncommon in the US as late as the 1910's if there were no relatives who could take the child.I don't konw how young a child in this situstion would be and still be called a "servant." Taking in a five-year-old was an act of charity, while hiring a fourteen-year-old was strictly employment. My guess is that there was a continuum between. -Arch dude (talk) 00:59, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was fairly common in Ohio at that time for a girl (especially from poorer families) to work as a domestic servant, a famous example from the years in question being Annie Oakley. Payment was room and board and probably not much else. A girl would do this until she found a husband and could start her own family. In 19th century Ohio a girl could be legally married starting at age 14, with the consent of her guardian. So, everything that you mention seems perfectly plausible. —Kevin Myers 03:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; wow, that's interesting about Annie Oakley; I didn't realize she was born in Ohio.

Another famous example was Mary Alice "Allie" Smith, who came to live with an Indiana family in exchange for room and board. Her obituary says she was about 10, but other sources say she was taken in in 1862, when she would have been 11 or 12. Allie told "gobble-un" stories that emphasized the need to, among other things, "dry the orphant's tear," and those were subsequently memorialized in the poem Little Orphant Annie (the "Annie" spelling was a printer's error in a poem that proved too popular to correct). Allie didn't marry until she was 18, but I'm sure there were many cases when girls married as quickly as they could to escape domestic drudgery. John M Baker (talk) 17:08, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note to JMB's remark, above: This purported method of "escaping [the] domestic drudgery" of servitude omits a key detail: marriage to a man of means who would employ someone else to perform the chores of domestic drudgery usually falling to the wife...? -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:24, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doubleday, Mary Hewitt

I am a Civil War reenactor who will be portraying Mary Hewitt Doubleday. I have not been able to find any information on her. She was the wife of Abner Doubleday. This is the only information I have.

Doubleday, Mary H.

Date of Death 03-13-1907

Buried in Arlington National Cemetary with her husband

Wife of Abner Doubleday: CBMG USA RTD

I do know that she was from Baltiomre, MD.

Dotty Schirmer —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dotty Schirmer (talk • contribs) 20:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't find a lot, but according to the 1918 obituary by New York State's "Monuments Commission for the Battlefields of Gettysburg, Chattanooga and Antietam", titled In memoriam, Abner Doubleday, 1819-1893, and John Cleveland Robinson, 1817-1897, Mary Hewitt was a "daughter of Robert Morton Hewitt, a Baltimore lawyer" and devotion to his wife "was one of General Doubleday's best traits". ---Sluzzelin talk 22:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Abner devotes a whole sentence to his wife in My Life in the Old Army:

I was fascinated by the bright eyes of a Washington belle, Miss Mary Hewitt and my marriage took place on Jany 2, 1852.

I ran across a history of baseball which mentioned that the Doubledays were frequent diner guests of the Lincolns at the White House.—eric 04:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non-blood cousin terminology?

Hi, I've read the cousin article, but it seems to only talk about blood relationships. What if I have someone who is my mother's sister's husband's sister's daughter? What would that be called? I thought it would be some kind of "cousin", but she is not a blood relative. --71.141.148.143 (talk) 20:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, there's certainly no blood connection there (except to the extent that we're all ultimately related by blood, but sometimes extremely distantly and unidentifiably) and she's definitely no kind of cousin, because "cousin" implies a blood connection. She would be your aunt's niece by marriage, or the niece of your uncle by marriage. It would not be incorrect to refer to her as your aunt's niece or your uncle's niece. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:22, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try calling her "friend"; hopefully that fits :-) Nyttend (talk) 03:49, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note that while the formal definition requires blood relationship, the term "cousin" (or translated equivalent) is sometimes used in local dialects to denote any relation who isn't some other close relative. (e.g. in the southern United States, or other cultures where extended families are a major cultural feature). In such a situation, there isn't usually a degree or specification to the "cousin", all such "relatives not otherwise specified" would be referred to simply as a plain "cousin". So while it might be acceptable (depending on region) to refer to her as a cousin in relaxed situations like "I went with my cousin to the movies", I'll agree with Jack that she wouldn't count as a cousin for genealogical purposes. -- 128.104.112.113 (talk) 18:13, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kith, not kin?--Wetman (talk) 16:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I call this person my cousin's cousin. Polypipe Wrangler (talk) 12:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's quite correct, too, and probably more useful than my "aunt's/uncle's niece". It's interesting that "my cousin's cousin" (free of any context) could refer to me or one of my siblings, or to someone with no direct blood relationship to me at all. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:47, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not even the dog that piss against the wall of Babylon shall escape this judgement!

This line is used in loads (literally tens) of reggae songs - usually shouted at the beginning. Where was it from originally? A Bible quote? A movie quote? --84.68.141.134 (talk) 22:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spoken by Leroy "Horsemouth" Wallace in the film Rockers (1978), the full quote goes:

"I man serve Selassie I continually, no matter what the weak heart say.

And I know that I and I is like a tree, planted by the rivers of water,

and not even the dog that piss against the wall of Babylon shall escape this judgement

For I and I know that all of the youth shall witness the day that babylon shall fall"

Used a lot in dubstep too. ---Sluzzelin talk 23:04, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it might actually predate that. There's a Max Romeo song ('Babylon's Burning', I think) from the early/mid 70s AFAIK with the line at the beginning. --84.68.141.134 (talk) 23:09, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quoted from the Bible (Jeremiah 17:8): “For he shall be as a tree planted by the waters, and that spreadeth out his roots by the river, and shall not fear when heat cometh, but his leaf shall be green; and shall not be careful in the year of drought, neither shall cease from yielding fruit.”

In the Bible, "him that pisseth against a wall" is actually a way of referring to human males (1 Kings 14:10 etc.), not dogs... AnonMoos (talk) 23:15, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistani scholars

Is there any Muslim scholars who give speeches in Sindhi? Pashto? Baloch? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.128.184 (talk) 23:05, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You asked this question before already... AnonMoos (talk) 06:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]