Humanities desk
< January 10	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 12 >

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 11

Electoral vote counting

Does anyone know where the transcript of the counting of the electoral votes on 8 January, 2009 is? I checked the Congressional Record from the GPO site, it had the separate AM sessions of the two houses but not the joint session for the official count. Thanks, 216.160.50.46 (talk) 00:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is it, I think. --Cam (talk) 08:14, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, sorry, that doesn't work. Anyway it starts on House page H75 of the Congressional Record for January 8. --Cam (talk) 09:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two Questions before making a decision. Q1 and Now what?

There was a really good quote about asking yourself two questions before making a decision. A question which I have now forgotten, and "Now what?". What is the first question? Many thanks, --Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 03:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find a quote with the exact words "Now what?" but there is one which captures the intent: “Decide what you want, decide what you are willing to exchange for it. Establish your priorities and go to work.” by H.L. Hunt. 152.16.59.190 (talk) 06:09, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Saxony

I was wondering what was story behind the title Duke/Duchess in Saxony, which were held by the son and daughter of Ernestine dukes. But Queen Victoria, who married Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, was Princess of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and Duchess in Saxony; yet Infanta Antónia of Portugal, who was a Wettin female dynast in the Braganza line, was Duchess of Saxony. I also notice the sons and daughters the Albertine were Duke/Duchess of Saxony instead of in Saxony. Can anybody tell me why? --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 11:15, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's a rather thin explanation of "Duke in Bavaria/de:Herzog in Bayern", and also of "Duke in Mecklenburg/de:Herzog zu Mecklenburg" but I couldn't find one for "Duke in Saxony/Herzog zu Sachsen". If you do find out, stick it in an article somewhere. And what about "von und zu Liechtenstein"? Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

after EC::: Looks like a typo or translation issue. The German page de:Victoria (Vereinigtes Königreich) has "Prinzessin von Sachsen-Coburg und war Herzogin von Sachsen" and this "Antonia Maria Fernanda Micaela Gabriela Rafaela Francesca de Assis Ana Gonzaga Silvina Julia Augusta von Bragança und Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Infantin von Portugal" for de:Antonia Maria von Portugal. So the title is the same. There are occasionally German titles with "zu" instead of "von" but I don't know wheter there's any difference. That doesn't seem to apply here, though.--76.97.245.5 (talk) 11:43, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between "von" and "zu" can be conceptualized as the difference between "from" and "at", or "origin" and "possession". If the family still retains overlordship/control/ownership of the place in their surname, they get the "zu"; if they don't, they get the "von"; if they have two lines of inheritance they can be "von und zu". "Zu" is often used with a new possession of a new line to distinguish it from elder branches, especially when the younger branch obtains an entailed Majorat. Use tends to be sloppy, so you can't really depend on the use of the particles being accurate. And other uses occurred as well, with some mediatized families using "zu" as a marker of prior sovereignty. - Nunh-huh 12:03, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nuhn-huh, could you add that explanation to German nobility? Thanks. AnyPerson (talk) 21:17, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a one-sentence explanation in the introduction. - Nunh-huh 02:32, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you. AnyPerson (talk) 00:30, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arab/Israeli Conflict

Can anyone recommend a good book about the conflict over the last hundred years? Something from a disinterested point-of-view, as much as such a thing is possible. 80.229.160.127 (talk) 12:38, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure there's been a conflict for a hundred years; the Balfour declaration and the British conquest of the territory from the Ottomans didn't happen until 1917, only 91 years ago, and the first really headline-grabbing mass conflict didn't occur until 1929. AnonMoos (talk) 15:39, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The European diplomacy that set up the modern state system in the Middle East, and engendered the Balfour Declaration is described in David Fromkin, A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East. Widely read and recommended. --Wetman (talk) 18:03, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beginning of Confusion of the Lexeme 'Priest' or 'Priester'

When was the German lexeme Priester or the English lexeme 'priest' first used to translate kohen or hiereus? Question including modicum of background: Since the confusion by which Jewish and Christian usage may render Hebrew and Greek for either 'old man' (zaqen > presbyteros) or 'sacrificer' (kohen > hiereus) as 'priest' (originally simply 'old man', rarely a true comparative, in re instances in the LXX = OGr) seems to have been an early case of so-called 'dynamic equivalence', by which a term for a principal figure in churchdom was applied to a distinctly different principal figure in ancient israelite religion, when between the old English homilies of Aelfric (who still uses sacerd from the Latin) and the Germanic usage of Luther did this substitution occur? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billhattalmiyd (talk • contribs) 13:44, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Old English word was preost (a very early borrowing into Germanic from Latin, ultimately from Greek presbyter, as you mentioned), so Martin Luther had absolutely nothing to do with it. I doubt that there ever was a word in the English language with an etymology of "sacrificer" and a meaning of "Christian priest", and I'm not sure that the Hebrew word "kohen" etymologically means "sacrificer" anyway (the ordinary word for sacrificing an animal etc. in Biblical Hebrew is a verb from root q-r-b, not k-h-n). AnonMoos (talk) 15:25, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BR20: Flags of All Nations

Reading this article, I see of a British government publication "BR20" - Google seems to throw up nothing helpful. Does anyone know where I can find out more, obtain a copy, etc.? Thanks! ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 14:36, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Googling gives an ISBN of 0117729329, the publisher is Stationery Office Books. Amazon has a CD for EUR 130, but it is not in stock. Maybe your trusted bookseller can look it up and find a source? --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 14:46, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's available direct from TSO, see [1]. DuncanHill (talk) 02:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is SURYA NAMASKARAM?

WHAT IS MEANT BY SURYA NAMASKARAM? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GEENA SAJITH (talk • contribs) 15:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly the same thing as Surya Namaskara? Algebraist 15:10, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

both are same —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.104.212 (talk) 18:45, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

incest

IN Tamil Nadu, India, a girl can marry her uncle or uncle's son and it is not considered as a incest. What about western countries —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.104.212 (talk) 18:44, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Laws regarding incest. Strawless ^(talk) 19:32, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Thru edit conflict, but I'm adding because the link above mostly focuses on incest law rather than forbidden degrees of consanguinity in marriage laws, and though related, they are often legally distinct)

Most Western countries would permit the marriage of first cousins (the girl you describe and her uncle's son), but most would prohibit the marriage of an uncle and niece. There are exceptions.

In the U.S.: uncle/niece marriages are usually banned, the exception being Rhode Island, which permits uncle/niece (but not aunt/nephew) marriages - but only for Jews - because the former is not forbidden in Leviticus. [2]. Colorado and Minnesota follow the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act in exempting uncle-niece marriages that are "permitted by the established customs of aboriginal cultures." But it would astonish most Americans to learn that such marriages are permitted. Some states ban first cousin marriages, others restrict them, others permit them freely: see the list at [3]

In the UK: see Marriage (Prohibited Degrees of Relationship) Act 1986. For the original list of forbidden marriages: [4]: bans uncle/niece, permits first cousin marriage.

In France: [5] - Nunh-huh 19:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See also cousin couple for more background info. In some places, times, and cultures, first cousins are forbidden from marrying (largely for reasons of consanguinity); in others it is encouraged. Ah, the rich tapestry of human diversity! BrainyBabe (talk) 20:49, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As we discovered before on the ref desk, in Australia it is legal to marry your uncle. Gwinva (talk) 00:29, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Only if you're a woman... - Nunh-huh 06:14, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Canada, the Marriage (Prohibited Degrees) Act is very short and simple: the only people prohibited from marrying are those who are whole or half brothers/sisters or are linearly related (i.e. parent/child, grandchild, great-grandchild, etc.), whether naturally or by adoption. So if two people are otherwise free to marry, then marriage to a niece, nephew, or first cousin is legal. --Anonymous, 01:12 UTC, 01/12, 2009.

In Ancient China, people could marry cousins on their mother's side freely, but not their father's side. bibliomaniac 1 5 03:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My mother has two cousins who are first cousins to each other, and got married. They had to get special permission from the government, after blood tests and such. This was probably 20 or 30 years ago. And this is all hearsay and third-hand information and may not be entirely accurate! (This is also in Canada, by the way.) Adam Bishop (talk) 00:58, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One Nero Wolfe story mentions a law in some places that allows cross-cousins (children of a brother and a sister) to marry, but not ortho-cousins (children of two brothers or two sisters); that one character describes another as his ortho-cousin suggests to Wolfe that he is secretly consumed by forbidden desire. —Tamfang (talk) 05:57, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

radiation

we have a cellsite on our rooftop,is it dangerous to our health especially our reproductive system? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zareann (talk • contribs) 22:49, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

some people said that the radiation range of cellsites is very low should not affect anyone,some says we can still get pregnant, not really sterile but there will be deformities,i need a concrete answer

The article mobile phone radiation and health, including many references, may be of interest to you. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:34, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

paris to monacco?

i live in paris. how much could i expect to pay (roughyl) for return train tickets to monacco? am i allowed to travel there freely with eu citizenship? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.124.85.178 (talk) 22:54, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can check Rail Europe's website for a good idea of cost information. Costs will vary according to several factors. 152.16.16.75 (talk) 01:07, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how true it is, but Rail Europe has a reputation for only showing the more expensive fares, so as to induce tourists to buy rail passes. If you're already in Paris, why not ask at a travel agent or railway station? --Anonymous, 01:15 UTC, clarified 01:17, January 12, 2009.

The exact price of your ticket will vary depending on what time your train leaves and perhaps how far in advance you purchase your ticket. I checked the price for a return ticket leaving three weeks from today and returning four weeks from today and found that you can get return tickets traveling at a reasonable time of day for about €120. If you are comfortable with French you can look up the cost of your itinerary and even book your tickets at SNCF.com. According to our article Microstates and the European Union, Monaco is effectively part of the Schengen area, so there is no passport or identity control to enter Monaco from France, and you should be able to enter Monaco from France without difficulty regardless of your nationality or immigrant status. Marco polo (talk) 01:23, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]