Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2010 July 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.

July 12

A Very Important Question

Question Removed by OP

This is not a reference desk question as it is basically a request for an opinion on an opinion. --Saddhiyama (talk) 08:17, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

What you think about this, is this not too a "request for opinion for...etc" i.e. unsuitable for Refernece desk ?

One was a request to know the purpose of poetry. The other was espousing an untenable and ridiculous opinion and inviting us to buy into the said opinion by way of suggesting reasons why it was so. The only nodding points of correspondence were that both questions were on reference desks and both were related to poetry. In all other respects they were light years apart. Paraphrasing your question as "did poetry end in 1945" would move us to answer no. I'm sorry you do not appreciate anything more contemporary, but it's your loss. Here, should anyone be interested, is the original question. As it turns out, it is not so Very Important after all, or, if so, only in the most pooh bear sort of a way. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:30, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The "purpose of poetry" question was posed by 88.104.91.80, who's an Elsie sock. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:43, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey, what's "sock" and what's this 88.104.91.80 business ? Jon Ascton (talk · contribs)

88.104.91.80 is the IP address of a user who was not logged in when they posted. "Sock" is an abbreviated form of sockpuppet, a second (or greater) user account for an individual, one which is often associated with trollish behaviour. Bugs is known not to be keen on users who do not log in, and not keen either about sockpuppets; that the best explanation I have for his gratuitous vouchsafing of the information. I'm not sure one would conventionally term an IP address as a sock, but it's a minor point. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:11, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

If you were to actually bother looking into this instead of taking your typical ignorant potshots, you would discover that the admin User:TenOfAllTrades has determined that the 88.104 IP range is one of the realms of the banned user noted above. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:22, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Pronunciation and spelling of "Xanlar"

As Khanlar and Xanlar redirect to Goygol, I think that it should be useful to include, in the latter article, the various Azerbaijani spellings as well as the Azebaijani and English spelling and pronunciation. According to Azerbaijani alphabet and [1], I think the Cyrillic spelling is "Ханлар" and the pronunciation is [xanlar], but I found no authoritative source. Apokrif (talk) 12:59, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

can criminals be rich?

do criminals automatically lose all their money if convicted for life, or can a mass murderer serve for life while remaining rich? 84.153.234.184 (talk) 13:56, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

No, a person may still have money while in prison, (especially if they were good at hiding it). But seriously, while most people in prison for life are fairly poor since they spent a ton of money on fines, restitution, lawsuits, lawyers etc... and they most often did not have a lot of money to begin with, there is nothing that confiscates their wealth automatically, so if one were sufficiently rich enough before committing their crime, and their wealth was not related to their crime (they did not steal money to get rich), then it would be feasible that they might maintain some wealth. And as a side note, at least in the USA, convicted for life does not always mean they are in prison until they die. It is not terribly rare for prisoners sentenced to "life" to be paroled after 15 or 20 years. Googlemeister (talk) 14:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

We have an article (Life_imprisonment) which describes the eligibility for parole in various countries. I believe that US prisoners serve, on average, a longer "life sentence" than Western European ones. Many U.S. jurisdictions have a sentence of life without possibility of parole and the federal government requires a prisoner to serve 85% of their sentence. Not sure how they compute 85% of a life. Note also that the International Criminal Court would grant even those convicted of genocide a parole hearing after 25 years (not that they have had the chance yet, having just stopped their very first trial). Rmhermen (talk) 14:18, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The article on life imprisonment was very short on specifics, which I can understand since for even just the USA it would need to have different rules for each of the 50 states and a separate set of rules for federal cases. The OP has not specified a country or jurisdiction within a country, so my answer was based on the US. I can see some countries using a life sentence as a nice excuse to confiscate the finances of their prisoner as a matter of course, but I am not aware of specifics as to where this might apply. Googlemeister (talk) 16:28, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

A story Myron Cohen used to tell: A guy is sent to prison for bank robbery, but most of the money was never found. He gets a letter from his wife, "I'm going to dig up the back yard and plant a garden." The husband replies, "Don't dig up the back yard!" The wife answers back, "The FBI came out today and dug up the back yard." The husband writes, "Now you can plant a garden!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:11, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Under some situations, the state can seize assets and sell them off at auction. In some jurisdictions, the state can require the inmate to pay for their own incarceration. But there's no generalized rule that says that someone should be made destitute just because they are imprisoned. It doesn't sound like a good idea, either, as a general rule. In some situations you want the victims to be compensated (e.g. if someone has defrauded them), but as a general rule, there's no reason that committing a crime should equate with losing one's assets, or the ability to have them disposed of as you wish after you have died. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:22, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Not only can people have money whilst imprisoned, they can also earn money (although, rarely legally) in jail. Prisons development their own economical structures between the inmates, and some that become quite wealthy. --Soman (talk) 15:55, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

In Ireland the Criminal Assets Bureau was set up to target the money of criminals and has had relative success in taking illegal earnings from the criminals. Mo ainm~Talk 18:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

On a related note ... you should be aware that some states in the USA require inmates to pay for the cost of their incarceration. So, if they calculated the cost for all of the many years of a life sentence, the prisoner can end up owing the State quite a bit of money ... and it can easily "wipe out" his riches. Of course, most prisoners will "hide" their money somehow, so as to avoid the State taking it. Thanks. (64.252.65.146 (talk) 20:26, 12 July 2010 (UTC))

(ec) In the US, a criminal's property does not automatically revert to the state, or anything, when he is convicted. All of his money remains his. There are three major reasons I can think of that the criminal would lose some or all of his money. (A) Some crimes carry a fine as well as a jail sentence. To pick a crime from California as an example, money laundering, first offense, can get the criminal a year in jail plus a fine of US$250,000 or twice the value of the amount he laundered, whichever is greater. That alone might wipe him out financially. The state could and would use all its means to identify all the assets of the criminal if necessary to collect this judgment. (B) Whoever is victimized can file a civil lawsuit to collect damages; for example, Fred Goldman obtained a judgment against O.J. Simpson for over US$33 million, over the murder of Goldman's son. (Civil suits have a better chance of succeeding against a criminal after he's been found guilty in court. OJ's case was unusual in that (among a thousand other unusual things) he was found not guilty in criminal court, but was found liable in civil court.) This also could wipe out the criminal financially. (C) Asset forfeiture occurs against money that the criminal possesses which is the proceeds of crime. If an illegal heroin distributor accumulates US$1 million in money, houses, and cars as the proceeds of his illegal heroin distribution business, then the state or federal government may seize it, legally. To go back to your original example of a mass murderer, I would think that point (B) above would probably bankrupt any given mass murderer. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:35, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Obese old people

I have seen a lot of really obese people of both gender. But I have not seen really obese old people. Where are all the really obese old people hiding? 122.107.192.187 (talk) 14:18, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

You're not looking hard enough. For example, have you seen Aretha Franklin lately? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:26, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, there are potentially a few things going on here. One is that obesity may influence life expectancy. Another is that it may be a generational thing—people who are currently in their 80s may have grown up before the current high obesity trends really set in. And another is your own exposure to the elderly. How many really elderly people do you regularly see? I imagine if you were at a rest home, you'd see far more variety in body weight, especially when one factors in decreased overall mobility as both something that goes with age and obesity. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:28, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

There have been plenty of porkers in all generations past. Typically the very old might tend to become frail and lose weight, so there probably aren't all that many really heavy ones in their 90s. But I can think of several instances of my parents' generation and earlier generations where the folks were quite large. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:36, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, the plural of anecdote is not data, Bugs. Your assertion that obesity rates have been fairly constant in the past does not, I don't think, hold very much water in and of itself. --Mr.98 (talk) 15:48, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not claiming so. I'm just saying obesity is nothing new. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:57, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The pertinent question is the rates, which may (depending on who you believe) be new. Obesity in an individual is obviously not new. But the question of whether the rates are higher is obviously related to how many you'd see when walking about. --Mr.98 (talk) 18:44, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Somehow, I have the feeling that when the name of a country is not explicitly stated, people simply assume that the discussion is about the U.S.? Do note that the IP OP is an aussie. --Soman (talk) 16:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Speaking as someone who works in a day centre, I would say the obese old people are at home. It takes an amzing amount of effort to move if you are grossly overweight, even more if the weather is hot (which it can be most of the time in Aus). If you can get your groceries delivered, why bother to go anywhere? --TammyMoet (talk) 17:39, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

We need to define what "old people" means. To a child, a person aged 30 is old. To me, Aretha Franklin is not yet old, but she is starting to get on a bit. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:45, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

To illustrate the above: two days ago an 18-year old client of mine was relating an incident that had occurred in her workplace between herself and another woman she described as "really old". I asked her what she meant by "really old", and was told "Oh, she's at least 50". I, being almost 10 years older than that, replied in mock horror "At least 50? That old?". It went completely over her head. Next time I see her I must ask her how old she thinks I am. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 12:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

The obese usually die before they reach old age, that's why. 92.28.252.50 (talk) 21:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Shakespeare's longest work

Which is Shakespeare's longest work? How many characters does it contain? That is, if we would save the text as a pure ASCII file, how many bytes would we need? --Andreas Rejbrand (talk) 14:49, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Hamlet is Shakespeare's longest play. I feel it would be difficult for any of his other plays to have more characters of text than Hamlet because Hamlet is ridiculously long. There are many links to the text at the end of the article so you can see how many bytes long those files are. -- kainaw™ 15:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Project Gutenberg's ASCII text version is 188 KB, 12 KB of which is is the PG license, so 176 KB seems to be your answer. Sticking the text into MS-Word provides the following stats:

• 5317 Paragraphs
• 6770 Lines
• 31903 Words
• 140329 Characters
• 167171 Characters (with spaces)

--Tagishsimon (talk) 15:02, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Here is some relevant information, according to The Essential Shakespeare Handbook (ISBN: 0-7894-9333-0). Shakespeare's shortest play is The Comedy of Errors at 1,786 lines. Shakespeare's longest play is Hamlet at 4,024 lines. Thanks. (64.252.65.146 (talk) 16:18, 13 July 2010 (UTC))

I wouldn't rush to figure out the number of ASCII characters in a work by That Man from Stratford, since the number implies a precision we can't have. Original editions differ, and there's no end to the number of doctorates arguing about the Bad quartos, the First Quartos, and the First Folio. The section on the various texts of Hamlet notes that the 1601 quarto has only half the text of the 1604 quarto, which in turn lacks 85 lines that appear in the First Folio. The Folio appeared seven years after Shakespeare died, so we don't know what words or lines he actually wrote. --- OtherDave (talk) 01:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

what did the ancient Greeks (or earlier civilizations= have in terms of technology that could be analogous to USB?

If we look at ancient Greek civilization (or earlier), then what did they have in terms of technology that could be compared with USB? Thank you. 92.229.13.2 (talk) 19:34, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Do you mean general information transfer methods? I suppose writing is in the most vague sense analogous to USB, but honestly it's a real stretch of the imagination. Googlemeister (talk) 19:55, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

It's not clear what you are asking. The USB is an information transfer device attached to electronic devices. The ancient Greeks did not have any electronic devices. If you are interested in technologies aiding information transfer, then of course there was writing. As for the actual media allowing transfer, they had scrolls, typically made of papyrus. If it is standardization is what you are after, the ancient Greeks had some standardized sizes (and shapes) for certain kinds of amphorae, particularly wine amphorae. Marco polo (talk) 20:01, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

No, I know that they had standardized shapes. (For example the equilateral triangle). I was asking not from a standards point of view, but the hot-pluggable, serial bus connected to a host point of view. Like, USB you can just plug into, and it becomes part of the system, then hot-plug out of. To make a scroll analogy you would have to have one giant scroll which you could hot-plug little scrolls into or something. Obviously not appropriate. So my question is if they had anything like a host "device" (by any stretch of the imagination) that, like USB, could be expanded on the fly. wheels, gears, turbines, anything at all can qualify, as long as it has this hotpluggable expandability thing. sorry I wasn't more clear earlier. 92.229.13.2 (talk) 21:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

It's hard to envisage any kind of 'technology' known to have been generally available to the Ancient Greeks that would function in this way: the nearest analogy that springs to mind would be a cart or chariot to which one could harness an additional pair of oxen or horses. However, there are hints that at least some Greeks of the period had access to mechanical technology that might possibly have accommodated some "add-on expansion": see the Antikythera mechanism. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 21:27, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Not even cold-pluggable. Until the invention of interchangeable parts, most of the technological artefacts humans made were one-offs, bespoke built to the specific job at hand. By and large even watchmakers would make all the components of their watches - they wouldn't buy a type 143 watch wheel from another watchmaker. While some things were moderately mass produced, things that had to work as part of other things were made by the same person who was making the whole macro-thing. So a shipbuilder would build all the parts of the ship, bar maybe buying in the nails and rope (and even then maybe not). This is vertical integration, of a rather inefficient species. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 21:27, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Pheidippides? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:17, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Wax tablets could be considered a similar thing. You can write smallish chunks of information on them and send them to someone else. They're not very secure unless they're encrypted, and you can erase and rewrite the information a number of times. They're also not a very good long-term information storage method. They were relatively new technology, too. Apparently in Greek they were called 'deltoi'. Steewi (talk) 01:36, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Spears in a phalanx, perhaps, when the ones sticking out of the shield wall shattered. --- OtherDave (talk) 01:58, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Lost expeditions

Have there been any expeditions, to perhaps ruins or lost cities or something exciting, where the group have documented discoveries of the remnants of previous expeditions, from perhaps several centuries previously? Fascinating stuff. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 20:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps Franklin's lost expedition may interest you, I don't know if it meets your criteria sufficiently. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 20:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

You might also look at Percy Fawcett. --rossb (talk) 22:36, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

You might even look for Percy Fawcett. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 08:43, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I seem to recall incidents of this sort in the Scramble for Africa, at least according to Pakenham's book. Sadly I don't have it to hand. And if of any use, there's always Stanley finding Livingstone. You'd also expect to find this occurring in maritime history; the beached being found years later. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:43, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

In the Arctic (or Antarctic), where there are not much people, and natural conditions helps preservation somewhat, I think this has happened quite often. For example, the remains of S. A. Andrée's Arctic balloon expedition of 1897 were found by another expedition in 1930, according to the article. They even recovered the film from the camera and processed the pictures. Fascinating. Jørgen (talk) 18:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks guys, that is the kind of thing I was hoping to find. Cheers S.G.^(GH) _ping! 21:28, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks also to Finlay McWalter for bringing to mind Lord Franklin, sometimes called Lady Franklin's Lament.

Through cruel hardships they vainly strove

The ship on mountains of ice was drove

Only the Eskimo in his skin canoe

Was the only one who ever came through...

--- OtherDave (talk) 02:10, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

The remains of Mallory from the British Mount Everest Expedition 1924 were found in 1999 but not his camera or the picture of his wife he was going to leave on the summit. So it still isn't certain if he made it to the top. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 22:44, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

armpit smelling

Hello, I like to smell my wife's armpit, what does that mean? Am I pervert? Urgent, sos. 92.229.13.2 (talk) 20:33, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Simple answer: Yes, you're a pervert. And what's wrong with that? :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:39, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Liking the smell of your wife's armpit is unlikely to be considered a perversion by many; nor does it "mean" anything in particular. You may, though, be a troll. It's hard to say. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps this quote from Woody Allen will put things in perspective for the OP:

Q: Is sex dirty?

A: Only if you're doing it right.

←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I was all excited when I saw we had an article Armpit odor, but then I realized that it's only a re-direct to Body odor, an article that could certainly be expanded. Anyways, Perversion is a very slippery term, but in general, I would say that liking a certain person's body odor, while probably not normal, probably isn't considered deviant enough by most people to consider it a perversion. Buddy431 (talk) 22:43, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Huh?? Not normal?? Liking a person's body odour is an essential part (not the only part, but still an essential part) of being attracted to them. Or, to put it another way, if you're attracted visually (or otherwise non-olfactorily), and then get up close and like what you smell, your attraction is heightened immeasurably. If you dislike what you smell, that might be a temporary and easily correctable glitch, or it might spell the end of the road. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 02:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't believe that I'm qualified to answer your question literally. But as a layman, is it causing a problem? If not, I fail to see any issue. Human sexuality is quite complex. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 02:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

According to the Joy of Sex by Alex Comfort, body odour is an important part of sexual attraction, whether consciously or sub-consciously. He implies at one point that this is why French women don't wash as assiduously as US or UK women - because they know it attracts men. Chacon a son gout, you might say. So don't worry, you're just one of those who are conscious of its effect on you. --TammyMoet (talk) 14:34, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Readable ancient classics non-fiction narrative prose?

What are the most readable ancient classics non-fiction narrative prose texts, that can be read for pleasure rather than study? I mean work written hundreds or thousands of years ago. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.29.123.193 (talk) 23:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

It depends on what you're interested in. "Non-fiction narrative" pretty much restricts you to works of history, doesn't it? I think both Herodotus and Xenophon are readable and interesting. Deor (talk) 23:44, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

In addition to Xenophon's historical work, he also wrote the horse-training manual On Horsemanship which I (though not a rider) found quite interesting. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 08:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War will reward you well. -- Paulscrawl (talk) 05:27, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

It could also be philosophy or biography. For the latter, anything by Plutarch, but mainly his Parallel Lives are very entertaining to read. It could also be Diogenes Laertius or Cornelius Nepos. For philosophy there are the many dialogues of Plato, although strictly speaking they are most likely fictive. It could also be oratory, by the likes of Demosthenes, Isocrates, Isaeus or the Roman Cicero. If your are so inclined the Amarna letters from ca 1400 BC is also very interesting, and you could say each letter contain "non-fiction narrative". --Saddhiyama (talk) 09:07, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, autobiography or something written in the first-person would be my preferance. I've already read the Autobiography by Benvenuto Cellini, and The Alexiad by Anna Komnene. They are likely to be listed here: List of Penguin Classics. I see there is a List of autobiographies and mention of some early ones at Autobiography. 92.24.189.3 (talk) 09:20, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

We only have few extant autobiographies from the Mediterranean antiquity. The classic is of course the Confessions of Augustine of Hippo. Otherwise they usually exist in the form of speeches or short inscriptions (like the Res Gestae Divi Augusti of the emperor Augustus). The genre only really takes off during the renaissance. --Saddhiyama (talk) 09:53, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

If you really want to learn about the personal thoughts of the Greeks or Romans then there is an extensive literature of letters. Like the letters of Cicero, Pliny the Younger or Julian the Apostate. Or letters from mostly unknown people as published in the 3 volumes of Select Papyri in the Loeb Classical Library (which by the way is one of the best series of English translations of classics that you will find. They have a lot of works not available in translations anywhere else). --Saddhiyama (talk) 09:57, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I just remembered that the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius are written in first person, although a collection of random thoughts, they are very moving and gives an incredible insight into the mind of a Roman emperor. It is also interesting to combine them with the depiction of him we get from the letters of his tutor Marcus Cornelius Fronto (also in the Loeb series) --Saddhiyama (talk) 10:05, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Portions of the Bible are extremely readable. I particularly recommend Genesis (feel free to skip over the genealogies) and the Gospel of Luke. John M Baker (talk) 11:19, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I've already read a lot of it when forced to do so at school. And the stories are already very familiar, although I can never find the chapter about Santa Claus. 92.24.184.61 (talk) 13:34, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Some more ancient stuff is The Gallic Wars by Julius Caesar, especially the parts where he is an accidental ethnographer. But what is the definition of "ancient" here? (I am just wondering, because Anna Komnene and especially Cellini are not "ancient".) If you also want to read medieval and Renaissance works then the list would be almost endless. Adam Bishop (talk) 11:20, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm looking for things over 200 years old. I have read some already - I've already read Aurelius's Meditations and (not mentioned yet) Franklin's Autobiography. I'm mostly after a good read rather than necessarily reading about well-known figures from the past, since the drawback about reading the best known is that you already know the plot. Thanks again. 92.24.184.61 (talk) 13:31, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

From the 17th and 18th centuries, Pepys's diaries are pretty readable and interesting (at least at some points), and Defoe's A Journal of the Plague Year, though fictionalized, is heavily based on real accounts, and is both fascinating and fun. --Mr.98 (talk) 16:51, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Casanova's History of My Life may be the most irresistibly readable work I've ever encountered. Deor (talk) 21:03, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

The Secret History of Procopius is fascinating. If you're a fan of classic SF, you may be surprised to see its influence on De Camp's Lest Darkness Fall. John M Baker (talk) 02:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

A couple of years ago (ancient history in Wikipedia-time) the refdesk discussed "readable classics" here. Be aware that many will interpret "classics" as Classics, i.e. Ancient Greece and Rome. When you refer to mere hundreds of years ago, you widen the field somewhat. Mark Twain defined a classic as a book everyone wants to have read and nobody wants to read. BrainyBabe (talk) 19:36, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

No one has mentioned Eastern classics, such as The Pillow Book or Matsuo Bashō's Oku no Hosomichi, which have the advantage of being less well known in the West and hence being fresh and new for the reader. Are there any others that are outside the Roman/Greek/Western cannon? Its nice to step outside the familiar stuffy Western culture. Is there anything from outside bloth the Western and Eastern cultures? 92.15.9.213 (talk) 08:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Some Eastern (i.e. Asian) books were mentioned in the "readable classics" discussion I linked immediately above. Another find from the refdesk archive is Enjoyable eastern and other non-western ancient classics?.BrainyBabe (talk) 14:12, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

One not mentioned there which I found very readable was Ibn Battuta's Rihla. Warofdreams talk 14:48, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Travel literature also lists some interesting things, as do the See Also links from Diary. Some day I will read the Epistulae (Pliny). The Ascent_of_Mont_Ventoux by Petrarch is good, although I do not know if anything else of his is equally enjoyable. 92.24.182.219 (talk) 12:53, 16 July 2010 (UTC)