Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2010 September 1

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.

September 1

Is Athens monarchy still around in current times?

Hi,I'm researching for my world history class and I'm wondering if the ancient Athenian monarchy still existent in modern America. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NekotoShimisu (talk • contribs) 00:02, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

This one? That hasn't been around for 2500 years...or this one? Adam Bishop (talk) 00:03, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

????? How would an Athenian monarchy be existent in any country outside Greece? How could it get all the way to America? -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 01:46, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

You don't mean Athenian democracy, at all, do you? - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 07:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

The current "Crown Prince of Greece", Pavlos, attended Georgetown University, and the list of his business interests suggests that he may well have a residence in the US. However, the modern Greek Royal Family only descends from this man, who was Danish and took the throne in 1863, so it's not really relevant to the question as set. :) Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

There was also the Duchy of Athens, but it is only about 1000 years old; there are probably extant families which could claim some connection back to the Duke of Athens. --Jayron32 03:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

20 July plot

How would history have changed if the 20 July plot had succeeded? --75.33.216.97 (talk) 01:31, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

The usual response is that we can't answer speculative questions like this on the Reference Desk. But really, by that point, in 1944, things probably wouldn't be much different. Maybe if the Second World War stopped immediately...but why would it have? Adam Bishop (talk) 02:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

It would have been more difficult for the ussr to have taken control of eastern europe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.189.5.135 (talk) 03:32, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

It is unlikely that the entire Nazi war machine would have ground to a halt. Hitler was not singlehandedly making every decision regarding the running of Germany or of the War. It is likely that succession had been worked out in advance. Indeed, when Hitler did commit suicide a year later, Joseph Goebbels was his designated successor, though Goebbels himself committed suicide only a few days later, leaving Karl Donitz to try to scrap together a government. It wasn't Hitler's suicide in 1945 that brought an end to the war, though, it was the other way around: The imminent collapse of Germany and the advancing armies from the east and the west caused Hitler to "give up" as it were. In 1944, with the War going differently, an assassination would have brought a clear successor (likely Goebbels) into power; the war would have likely ended on roughly the same timeframe with Goebbels at the helm. --Jayron32 05:13, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

If the plot had succeeded completely, there would have been a non-Nazi government installed (see 20_July_plot#Planned_government). AFAIK they would have tried to stop the war as soon as possible, since they knew it was lost, in order to prevent Germany from being totally defeated and occupied. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 17:05, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

university book store chains in the English speaking world.

I have a product that I wish to sell through university and technical school book stores. Can anyone tell me what chains of university book stores their are that operate in the English speaking world? — —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.189.5.135 (talk) 03:06, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

List of bookstore chains or Category:Bookstores may be a place to start your search. --Jayron32 05:08, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

If it's a book you're selling, the best way to get it into university bookstores is for someone to use it as a textbook for their course. Make all their students buy it in order to pass the course. Steewi (talk) 09:46, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

To this end, you should literally bribe the professors who might use your book with cash payments. 84.153.216.210 (talk) 12:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Barnes and Noble manages the Harvard/MIT Cooperative Society, which seems like as good a place as any to try and get your product accepted for a first time. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:08, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Barnes & Noble operates lots of U.S. college bookstores these days, don't they? Deor (talk) 13:35, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, indeed. I would not be surprised if they were the primary overarching chain for most of the US college bookstores. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:45, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Most UK university bookshops are run by Blackwell's. Warofdreams talk 16:35, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

FWIW, most Australian universities use the Co-op Bookshop to supply textbooks. Steewi (talk) 10:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Ending world hunger

This may be stating the obvious, but it seems pretty inexcusable that people are still dying of starvation in parts of the world when elsewhere in the world people are throwing food away. I recall Henry Kissinger's famous 1974 pledge that within a decade no child would go to bed hungry. What concrete, practical initiatives are national governments, UN agencies and other international organizations currently taking to end world hunger? And what can individuals do to help? --Viennese Waltz ^talk 11:04, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Malnutrition covers the difficulties and complexities quite well. As for what you can do as an individual, donating to charitable organizations with good reputations, like Oxfam, is probably the most cost-effective way to use your extra resources to benefit those who need them. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:21, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Indeed Viennese Waltz, I share your feelings about food wastage. This [report] says the world already produces enough food to support the world's population — 6 billion people — and could support double — 12 billion people. Stopping war would seem to be a good step, at the very least the resources could be redirected to getting the food to where it was needed before it spoiled. Government policy is also at fault in some cases. Zimbabwe used to be a major food exporter, but the goverment policy of 'land redistribution' is apparently responsible for major reductions in agricultural output, see Zimbabwe#Economy. Meanwhile from Famine#Famine_prevention "..in the case of Malawi, almost five million of its 13 million people used to need emergency food aid. However, after the government changed policy and subsidies for fertilizer and seed were introduced, farmers produced record-breaking corn harvests in 2006 and 2007 as production leaped to 3.4 million in 2007 from 1.2 million in 2005. ... Malawi became a major food exporter".[1]

• See Famine relief, Malnutrition (as Mr.98 mentions), particularly Malnutrition#Management, Starvation and related links, World Food Programme, World Hunger Relief. Food security also seems very relevant. Hope this helps. 220.101 talk^\Contribs 13:58, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Addendum: Going Vegetarian may help, from Vegetarianism#Environmental "Ecology professor David Pimentel has claimed, "If all the grain currently fed to livestock in the United States were consumed directly by people, the number of people who could be fed would be nearly 800 million". [2] - 220.101 talk^\Contribs 14:21, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I think you're being a bit naive. The EU currently procudes so much food it pays farmers to stop orducing. There's a lot of food, it's just in the wrong place. It's mainly bad land management. Sudan, Darfur, Ethipian droughts were mostly caused by vast herds of cattle destroying the grasslands. I remember a picture of a lush green triangular farm in the middle of the desert. If the land was well managed it could produce food without being destroyed. Marginal lands could become lush farmland rather than turning into desert.--178.167.247.73 (talk) 17:27, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

There is probably plenty of food now to feed a world population of 4 billion, which was the population in 1974 when Kissinger supposedly made the ill-thought-out remark. But the population expands geometrically. The tillable acres of land does not, nor does the water needed for irrigation in much of the world. Edison (talk) 18:33, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

• '178' I did mention government policies, which to me basically equates to management. In Zimbabwe circa 2000 about 4,000 farmers (who happened to be white) were forcibly thrown off productive farms and the land re-distributed to supposed veterans of their war for independence. (see Zimbabwe#Economy) The result was a massive 'crash' in productivity and food importation rather than export as before. I also mentioned diverting 'ex-military' resources "to getting the food to where it was needed". 220.101 talk^\Contribs 21:35, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually there is plenty of land that could be reclaimed with a large enough investment. And most irrigation is a completely unsustainable practise that is like salting the land. Exceptions are using fog and desalinized water.--178.167.247.73 (talk) 19:22, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Family planning, Contraception, Zero growth. All part of the hunger picture--Wetman (talk) 01:02, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

As pointed "the population expands geometrically. The tillable acres of land does not, nor does the water needed for irrigation in much of the world". A population that keeps growing, and resources that do not, lead to an unavoidable end. The only way to fix it would be by removing either of both factors from the equation. The first one is unlikely: we would need both some disaster to dramatically reduce worldwide population, and a system to prevent it from growing back again. The other is unlikely now, but may be fixed with proper technological advance. We need a source of food capable to grow in levels to match the population. This will never be done while we still depend on farming and cattle for making food. We need a way to produce (not just process) food completely inside a factory. We need to harness the power of photosynthesis, which allows plant to create organic material (=food) out of inorganic ones, and repeat it in industrial levels. MBelgrano (talk) 02:37, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I think there is alot of alarmism surrounding world hunger. neo-malthusian ideas that we have reached our capacity for food production are fairly silly. According to the gross world product article world per capita income is US$10,500 which is considerably more than subsistance. The problem at present is the distribution of that income. The poorest countries lack the basic infrastructure and law-enforcement needed to allow them to produce their own food or produce something they could trade for food. See new growth theory (although our article is pretty bad) There is alot of land that could be producing food that is not. There is alot of land that is producing food very inefficiently. There is alot of food that is just discarded. Also, food production in poorer countries is considerably hampered by the overly protectionist policies of wealthier countries, particularly the US and UE (perhaps japan too) See: Agricultural policy of the United States. Common Agricultural Policy. 124.171.201.251 (talk) 03:59, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Reliable Mexican Biofuel Statistics

I am looking for some reliable biofuel production statistics (any unit of measure) for 2008 and 2009 for Mexico. Preferably disaggregated by fuel type (e.g. ethanol and biodiesel). FO Licht has this data from what I know, but their online database is by paid subscription only... Any help immensely appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.137.225.112 (talk) 13:23, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Works by Pieter de Hooch

Hello great Reference Desk people. I have added a list of 84 works by Pieter de Hooch back in 2005, which I had found on a website which I now doubt was a very solid reference. At that time, references tended to be less common than they are now. Little changes have been made to this list ever since. I now seriously doubt that this list is accurate/ up-to-date. One reason being that over time, paintings attributed to a painter are discovered to have been painted by someone else. On top of that, different sources give different titles and years to the paintings, so that it is in fact quite hard to figure out what is what. I would like to clean up this list, and maybe make it in a table format with pictures. But before that I would need to have a reliable list to work on. Could you tell me where I can find something like an authoritative list of works by this painter, or how I could assemble such a list? Thanks a lot in advance! olivier (talk) 14:24, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Wolfgang M. Freitag, Art books: a basic bibliography of monographs on artists gives several monographs, Arthur de Rudder, Pieter de Hooch et son oeuvre 1914 and others are utterly superceeded by Peter C. Sutton, Pieter de Hooch. Complete Edition. Valentiner listed 176 paintings, Sutton drops 34 of them and adds 25. Half a dozen paintings remain controversial. New pictures turn up from time to time. Wikipedia needs a real article on Pieter de Hooch, not a list, which is best done elsewhere.--Wetman (talk) 00:24, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

List are perfectly acceptable material on Wikipedia. In fact we even have Featured Lists. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 02:17, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Online resources would be more useful for me at this point. I agree that the current article needs a lot of improvement. This being said, yes, Wikipedia has lists, and some of them are even very good ones. Well, I am quite sure that User:Wetman knows that very well already. There are 1861 featured lists as of today. Some examples of lists that I find interesting: List of paintings by Johannes Vermeer (which needs improvement) and Christopher Walken filmography (this one is featured). And no, list of paintings by de Hooch do not seem to be well done anywhere online, therefore my question, and therefore my willingness to add one to Wikipedia. olivier (talk) 04:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

That thing behind you...

I want to know what is the exact term for the piece of cloth that flows behind Mandrake the Magician, it's attached by sort of studs to his coat shoulder. Was this really ever used as a part of dress in real life ?  Jon Ascton  (talk) 16:57, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd call it a cape. See, for example Inverness cape. (Maybe there's a more specific name for Mandrake's type of cape). ---Sluzzelin talk 17:01, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Is it only in comicbook author's imagination or some real life personality did actually use it (on stage even) ?  Jon Ascton  (talk) 17:08, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Sure, a number of stage magicians wore capes pre-Mandrake. Why, even Vincent Price wore one (top right), mad though he was. If you get a cape, you can be a magician too. Deor (talk) 17:27, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

From a magical perspective, it's useful for a stage performer as both a distraction and a useful item with secret pockets. I don't think there's a specific name for the off-the-shoulder version. Steewi (talk) 10:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

More to the point, however, capes were standard, functional items of clothing for certain classes - military officers and aristocrats, mainly - only dying out in the early 20th century (with the widespread use of the trench coat, I think). Basically a cape was a shawl or wrap made out of high-quality material and designed to protect against cold and rain. It was adopted by stage magicians (and foisted upon innumerable superheroes) because it gave an air of authority and mystique. --Ludwigs2 17:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Capes were also used by circus performers, and Superman's cape and costume were inspired by such. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:01, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

His cousin Batman was known as the "caped crusader". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:40, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Zorro also wore a cape, presumably for practical use, but it certainly had dramatic effect, flowing and rippling as he would ride away. Similarly with Superman, whose cape would ripple as he flew (provided the off-screen wind machines were working right). Zorro might have had a good reason to wear a cape, on those chilly desert nights; but for Superman it appears to have no practical use whatsoever. Superman is pretty much impervious to the extremes of weather, so at best it's merely a decoration. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:49, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Zorro was likely familiar with the cape and sword style of swordplay. See Italian school of swordsmanship - he was such a swordsman he couldn't restrict himself to only the Spanish school. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 02:15, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

you say that now, but you try running around all day in spandex. being impervious doesn't mean he doesn't get cold, it just means he's not going to die from it. --Ludwigs2 01:45, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Capes are probably a bad idea on superheroes, if you're planning on flying anywhere. Vimescarrot (talk) 11:54, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Exactly P. S. Burton (talk) 14:35, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Flying Cow

What is meaning of this the term "Flying Cow" ?  Jon Ascton  (talk) 17:25, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

In what context? There is a "24-bit D/A and A/D converter" (whatever that may be) of that name here, and a web design agency here, for example. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:46, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

No, not that context, it has got to do something with supernatural  Jon Ascton  (talk) 18:28, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

It's the traditional symbol of Luke the Evangelist, if that helps. (I don't know why our article doesn't mention it.) Marnanel (talk) 17:57, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Mentioned here under its more usual description of "winged ox". Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:02, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Was he flying or just jumping over the moon? The moon-jumping cow has been seen in other literary contexts as well. --Jayron32 03:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Is it a Malapropism Catachresis of Flying pigs? --Dweller (talk) 11:04, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Workers who unload boats

What do we call the workers who unloaded ships or boats before mechanisation? Race-related or nationality-related terms such as "coolies" aren't what I want; I'm writing something related to the Ohio and Erie Canal in the early nineteenth century, when statistics tell us that there was no realistic chance of the canal workers not being white Europeans. It's a common term, and I've heard it before, but I can't quite remember it; I can't find anything in dock or wharf, and the "teamsters" mentioned in Transloading doesn't quite seem to be the right term. Nyttend (talk) 17:41, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

What about Stevedores? --Sussexonian (talk) 17:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the link; either this or "longshoreman", mentioned in that article's intro, is what I wanted. Nyttend (talk) 17:48, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

In the US, we'd generally use 'dockhand' or 'longshoreman', though the latter (nowadays) is mostly reserved for unionized workers. --Ludwigs2 17:49, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

You may be interested in a question asked at this desk on 25 July, no. 9: "weighing job title". Some of your questions have been answered there. In the UK and Ire. they are referred to as: "dockers". As far as I know, Cooley, Collier, referred to one working on smelting iron, and amalgams. MacOfJesus (talk) 20:03, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

See Coolie, Mac. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 02:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Navvy?--Wetman (talk) 00:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

No: Navvies are builders (originally of canals), not loaders and handlers. --ColinFine (talk) 20:00, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

My understanding - from my grandfather who was a Merchant Navy officer - is that a Stevedor was a skilled worker who LOADED a ship. If you got it wrong, the ship capsized and sank, which was not a good outcome. Ships were UNLOADED by semi-skilled dockers who were hired on a daily basis. Alansplodge (talk) 10:40, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

You can see how I've used this term in the first paragraph of Canal Warehouse. Nyttend (talk) 21:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

In the UK the sirname: Collier, Cooley seems to have this origin, Mining/Smelting. MacOfJesus (talk) 13:37, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Sonnets to Sundry Notes of Music

Wikisource has a document called Sonnets to Sundry Notes of Music, which is filed under Shakespeare's works. It goes on to say that nobody actually knows who wrote them. So, my three questions:

1. What's the history of this document?
2. Why does Wikipedia appear not to mention it?
3. Why is it called "Sonnets" when no part of it is a sonnet? Marnanel (talk) 17:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

They were the last six works printed in The Passionate Pilgrim given that subtitle for no clear reason when published by William Jaggard. Jaggard like many publishers now and then was mainly a businessman out to make money and he might not have known or cared what the formal definition of the sonnet was, he certainly didn't care that not all of the works were by Shakespeare. As to why wikipedia doesn't mention it, less careful than an elizabethan publisher? meltBanana 21:53, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Hamlet's tonal issues

I read in a fashion magazine a few weeks ago about why Hamlet is still performed so much. In the article, the author calls the play tonally erratic. Although I could guess at a few, what are some specifics that make Hamlet tonally erratic? Thanks : ] 129.3.179.76 (talk) 18:29, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

If you're reading fashion magazines for drama criticism, its probably the first sign of a problem. My guess is it's puffery on the part of the author; they are self-aggrandizing by using words like "tonally erratic" without going into details about why they think so. It's pseudointellectualism; using language over the heads of ones audience and hoping they will be too dumb to check up on it, and instead just think that the writer is really smart... --Jayron32 03:26, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

That's too cynical and anti-intellectual. In fact, a standard view of Shakespeare is that his plays can change tone in unexpected ways, veering quickly from comedy to tragedy and back again, leaving modern folks a bit bewildered about how to react. This is not often called "tonally erratic", but the meaning of the term should be clear to those familiar with the plays.

As for the original question, the fashion magazine article (found via Google) actually said that Shakespeare's plays in general, and not Hamlet in particular, were "tonally erratic". It's easy to see how something like The Merchant of Venice could be called "tonally erratic"; it's a comedy and a romance, for the most part, but Shylock's fate is tragic, and this makes us uncomfortable. As for Hamlet, it has often been criticized as being "confusing or inconsistent", due in large part to Hamlet's wild mood swings, which a good performance can render intelligible. See Critical approaches to Hamlet. —Kevin Myers 07:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Not cynical or anti-intellectual. Part of being an effective writer is to know your audience, and to taylor what you write to whom you are writing for. That doesn't mean you can't discuss the erratic nature of Shakespears plays in a fashion magazine; rather what it might mean is that you explain it rather than use a phrase that your audience may not readily understand. Writing for a journal of literary criticism is very different than writing for a fashion magazine. It doesn't mean you cannot discuss the same issues, it just means you have to discuss them in a different manner. It's like writing for the Journal of the American Chemical Society vs. writing for a popular science magazine like Discover. Both publications may discuss the same subject, but the manner in which one would write for JACS is very different than one would write for Discover. Using a phrase like "tonally erratic" is to jargony for those unfamiliar with literary criticim. To be sure, I thought it was talking about the language of Hamlet; i.e. some sort of criticism of the poetry and prose and meter of the play, not about its themes and general style of writing. --Jayron32 04:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

People can distinguish neighbour's origins?

I cannot tell an Egyptian from a Pakisani, depite them being thousands of miles apart. I cannot tell a Pole from a Ukrainian. I can't tell a Nigerian from an Ethiopian. Yet I can tell an English or German person apart fairly easily. Why is this?--178.167.247.73 (talk) 20:12, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Your IP places you in Ireland. Assuming you live there, you would know the mannerisms, habits and even facial features of the English better than you would those of Egyptians or Nigerians. This gives you an advantage in recognition. Can you tell a Japanese from a Chinese? I studied Japanese and lived there for a while, and one of the things I get asked a lot is "But how do you tell them apart? They all look the same to me." I can, to an extent, simply because I am more familiar with Asians than the regular European. And it works the other way around - I can pretty easily mark someone from Europe as probably being from the South (like say, Italy or Greece) or from the Scandinavian North (as I suppose you can as well), while the Japanese I talk to haven't the slightest inkling about this. They aren't familiar with the subtle differences between us and so they think we all look alike. TomorrowTime (talk) 21:01, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

OP, if you are Irish and familiar with the Gaelic Language, you may find quite a similarity between it and the Language and customs and culture of Pakistan! To this day we do not know the connection. MacOfJesus (talk) 00:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, having lived most of my life in big US cities, I guess I get more exposure to these different ethnicities. I think I can tell an Egyptian from a Pakistani by looking at them, likewise a Nigerian from an Ethiopian. On the other hand, I couldn't tell a Ukrainian from a Pole, and I don't think I could necessarily tell an Englishman from a German, just by looking. (I will agree that there are some German types that would look out of place in England and vice versa.) Of course, if Germans or Englishmen started speaking, I could tell the difference! But surely there are Englishmen who by appearance alone could pass as Germans and vice versa? Personally, I have passed for an Englishman in England and a German in Germany, or at least it seems to me that I have, since I've been asked directions by locals in the local language in both places, though I am neither English nor German. So I find it a little hard to believe that you can tell for sure, just by looking, whether a person is English or German. Marco polo (talk) 01:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

You also can't tell by an editors 'name' what they are like as 'Marco Polo' would seem more appropriate for one who has travelled the world, esp Asia, quite extensively! A person's speech can be misleading. Met a young lady, I was 100% certain she was English, but she was a Bavarian. She had been sharing a house in Australia with some Pommys English Gentlemen for several months and sounded rather upper crust! 220.101 talk^\Contribs 02:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

^{[citation needed]} on the Irish language being comparable to some language or other from Pakistan. Marnanel (talk) 13:21, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

It's a banal answer but you know what you are familiar with. I can tell Hmong from Vietnamese from Chinese from Japanese, but that has to do with going to high school with all four groups. After living in Boston for awhile I can generally tell Haitian from Nigerian from East Indian from your general "African American", something I never would have been able to do in California, where I had sustained access only to the latter group. Conversely, I don't think I could tell English from German from French at a glance (assuming neither group was wearing stereotypical "national dress" like Lederhosen or berets with striped shirts) — my "white people" is just a big, homogenous blob (and I say this as a "white person"). (Which I don't think is different from most Americans, and why most Americans have historically been baffled at the European racial theories of the early 20th century, which purport to find huge differences between groups that really look identical to us, while generally glossing over the racial differences that historically have been important to us.) --Mr.98 (talk) 11:44, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Marnanel, An Oxford Professor of Celtic Languages was preparing to do this study, but unfortunatly died before he could begin. He took his holidays yearly in The Blasket Islands off Kerry each year, where Gaelic is the spoken Language. There are many names similar and musical parallels. MacOfJesus (talk) 15:47, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I have also heard that to a casual listener, Irish Gaelic can sound deceptively like some dialects of the coastal areas of Tuscany, such that some people cannot tell their Erse from their Elban. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 17:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

MacOfJesus, that is not a citation. Even if it is true that "An Oxford professor of Celtic Languages" was preparing to do this study, that would tell us nothing whatsoever. Had he done the study he might have concluded there was no significant relationship. Or he might have been totally barmy. --ColinFine (talk) 20:08, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

The citation I gave was / is: Blasket Islands. Some of the names are given, and their study. Their names come up with respective article pages. MacOfJesus (talk) 22:28, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Most Novels with same Hero

Which author holds the record for having written maximum numbers of novels (any language) with the same leading character ?  Jon Ascton  (talk) 20:20, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Probably not the record holder, but Frédéric Dard wrote 173 adventures of Detective Superintendent San-Antonio. olivier (talk) 20:37, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

That looks like quite a score. What's holding him back from holding a record ?  Jon Ascton  (talk) 20:48, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Maigret only had 103 novels or stories written about him, but lots of derivative works. 92.29.124.214 (talk) 22:58, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

As an aside, the film record, at least in the English record is likely Honolulu detective Charlie Chan, who besides the dozen or so novels is also featured in almost 50 movies. --Jayron32 03:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

For non-English filmography, Torasan of Otoko wa tsurai yo merits mention - 49 movies. In that article, I found a link to Wong Fei Hung, who, as the article says, had a "series of 99 films on (him) produced between the 1940s and 1960s in Hong Kong." That's pretty impressive. TomorrowTime (talk) 08:20, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Perry Rhodan has to be a contender... AnonMoos (talk) 06:41, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

That would be true for the OP's titular stipulation of 'most novels with the same hero', but not his subsequent 'which author holds the record . . .', since the long-running Perry Rhodan series (even excluding its spinoffs) has had a number of different authors. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 17:15, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

:I'd put money on Sherlock Holmes, if you allow all the stuff written by people other than Arthur Conan Doyle. Matt Deres (talk) 13:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC) Never mind; misunderstood the question. Matt Deres (talk) 13:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

There seem to have been around 200 Babysitters Club books credited to Ann M. Martin, and they appear to have all featured the same four lead characters. Warofdreams talk 15:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I count 456 books on List_of_Hardy_Boys_books. But I wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't a record. APL (talk) 02:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Roman dates

What reference point did the Romans use for year numbering? --75.33.216.97 (talk) 20:24, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Ab urbe condita. From the founding of the city of Rome. But they dated individual years by who was consul at the time. --Saddhiyama (talk) 20:30, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

See Roman calendar. olivier (talk) 20:32, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

In Biblical days, the practise was to indicate a year from who was in power at the time. In the Latin Gallic Wars the date was set by Caeser's/Governor's year in power. MacOfJesus (talk) 22:29, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Ab urbe condita dating was used by historians and annalists, and in certain ceremonial contexts, but not so often by ordinary people in their day to day lives... AnonMoos (talk) 06:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

what literal "mistakes" of Jesus does the bible imply

for example: Jesus says "I'll take 3 x" but the shop owner says: "sorry, we don't have x": thus Jesus's statement would have shown a mistaken belief on his part that there are x to take. (this is just implicit mistake). This is a hypothetical example: do you know a real one? 92.230.69.122 (talk) 20:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm no theologian, but I gather that Jesus was allowed to not be omniscient. See Matthew 11:25 (here, King James Version): "At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes." - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 21:07, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

"My God my god why has thou forsaken me?" or words to that effect were said on the cross, implying that he expected to be taken up to heaven by a group of angels or some such, but was disapointed. And the second coming - never happened. 92.29.124.214 (talk) 23:06, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Never happened yet. He didn't exactly give a concrete date for the second coming. Googlemeister (talk) 13:23, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

The guy is 2000 years late. He's not going to show. 92.29.120.223 (talk) 19:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

It took him 4,000+ years to show up the first time. Googlemeister (talk) 20:42, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

The closest "thing" to this, from the Gospels is the raising of Lazarus from the dead. Jn 11. Verse 37:"some remarked, He opened the eyes of the blind man, could he not have prevented this man's death?". Also: 35/36: "Jesus wept". Some have commented, from the past, that this shows Jesus did'nt know these things about to happen. The reason why Jesus wept has been the source of many Commentators "spilling ink". MacOfJesus (talk) 23:08, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

The words of Jesus: "My God, my God....", we all accept that He was quoting Psalm 22/21, the truly Messianic Psalm, that was about Himself, describing the Messiah's death to a "t". MacOfJesus (talk) 23:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

In Mark 13:32, Jesus states that he doesn't know when things are going to end, but God the Father does. I don't believe he ever claims to be omniscient on his own, though, so it's not a mistake.

In Mark 7:24-30, it appears as though Jesus changes his mind, which sounds more like what you're looking for. There are a number of weird things in the Bible that occur as a consequence of mortals being able to usefully petition God; consider Abraham's bargaining with God to defend Sodom, and Jesus' advice to wear God out with prayer until he answers it. While we're on weird human-God interaction, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Jacob beating God in a wrestling match. I have my own unformed WP:OR ideas about this, but I think I can say for sure that the subject is fascinating. Paul (Stansifer) 02:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Jacob beat God? In the Bible story I remember, Jacob wrestled with an angel, who (because he was losing) gave Jacob a dose of sciatica! --TammyMoet (talk) 09:15, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Bear in mind that a) physically wrestling with an incorporeal being is an incoherent notion; b) "Jacob wrestled with an angel", i.e. a messenger of God, and "Jacob wrestled with God" may essentially mean the same thing (just as "The king asked the dairymaid for some butter" is still true if in fact the king asked the queen and the queen asked the dairymaid); c) the story in Genesis 32 doesn't identify the being as an angel; d) during this incident, Jacob was given the name Israel, which means "he struggles with God", which is not insignificant. Marnanel (talk) 13:37, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand your logic on point b. Does that mean that if hypothetically it was the 1960s, and Mohammed Ali sent some little wimp to beat up on me, and I kicked him into the next county, I would have been able to say that I beat up Mohammed Ali??? Googlemeister (talk) 18:43, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Biblical Scholars have studied this subject at length and there are answers on all those points. You may be intrested in the Article page: Messianic Secret. If you are truly wanting to seek an answer to: Did Jesus make mistakes, did he know the future? then I can point you in the right direction. The most significant is the one I mentioned to you already: "Jesus wept." MacOfJesus (talk) 13:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

In cursing the fig tree he tries to get figs out of season, and then smites the tree for not having them. --Sean 17:44, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

• Good point. Reference is: Mat 21 v.18-22, & Mk 11 v.12-14. Gospel of Matthew, Mark 11, Gospel Harmony. MacOfJesus (talk) 18:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

The American Flag

Is it true that it is illegal in the US of A to have a Stars And Stripes design on knickers (="shorts" or "briefs" I think in American english)? 92.15.30.251 (talk) 20:46, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I think it's legal if you burn a US flag !  Jon Ascton  (talk) 20:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

According to United States Flag Code, it's technically illegal, though the article states that "there is no penalty for failure to comply with [the code] and it is not widely enforced." 24.91.31.112 (talk) 21:03, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Forty-five rules concerning the flag! 92.15.30.251 (talk) 21:37, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

In other words, it's illegal. Whether penalties exist or are enforced has nothing to do with the illegality of something. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:07, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

The First Amendment means that they can't ban you from mistreating the flag. That's why flag burning is legal. --75.33.216.97 (talk) 23:23, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

The US Flag Code is not law. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 23:36, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Concur with JackofOz. Also if you disrespect a countries flag in front of the wrong people and you may find their ire being 'enforced' on you irrespective of the legal status of your act. 220.101 talk^\Contribs 21:51, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article is, I think, wrong. If you follow the links to the actual text of the law, you will see that it uses word "should": for example, "The flag should never be used as wearing apparel" (emphasis added). Therefore using it as wearing apparel is not illegal; the law merely asks you not to. (As 220 said, it may be offensive to some people, but that's a separate issue.) At least, this should be correct unless there is a rule to the effect that saying "should" in a law makes something "illegal". --Anonymous, 22:18 UTC, September 1, 2010.

The flag of Ireland, has far more restrictions in force. First part of the Constitution is about this. And it is enforced by the Gardi and Army. MacOfJesus (talk) 22:08, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Whereas in the UK Union Jack undies are a perennial kitsch fashion item. 92.29.124.214 (talk) 23:09, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Long may it continue...[3] Alansplodge (talk) 09:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

By the way, the American English term is underpants. Marco polo (talk) 01:38, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

There was a famous incident in 1970 in which Abbie Hoffman went onto Merv Griffin's talk show wearing a shirt made from a flag. The networks visually censored it. Although the U.S. flag code discourages wearing flags as clothing, there is much more likely to be a stir if it's done as a protest. But a "stir" is the result, not an arrest. You can be arrested for burning the flag in protest, but not directly. Instead, you would be charged with public endangerment or disturbing the peace or something like that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

On the other hand, you can sell anything that people will give you money for. Adam Bishop (talk) 02:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

There seems to be a lot more of that kind of thing than there once was. Given the sorry state of patriotism in America, this is better than nothing. Here's a dilemma, though: How do you dispose of an article of clothing that looks like a flag? In theory, you're supposed to reverently burn it. But open burning is forbidden in most places anymore, and tossing it into your fireplace doesn't quite cut it. So you would likely have to take your worn-out-flag jacket or knickers or whatever to your local American Legion and have them ritually burn it... and be prepared for a raised eyebrow or two. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

That other American flag, the Confederate Flag, is the one most commonly used for knickers, kitsch, and so on. Pfly (talk) 07:44, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Which seems fitting. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

How would Libyan authorities handle such dilemma? --Soman (talk) 19:26, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Easy. They'd just ban green underwear. (For some reason the idea of green underwear makes me semi-nauseous, so I'd never need a ban, but that's just me.) -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Even pretty pastel shades? Or lime green tight lycra? Where's your sense of chlorofun? 86.161.108.172 (talk) 19:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Accomplices, accessories and complicity

Mainly for the purpose of improving and reorganising the articles accomplices, accessories and complicity, it would be helpful if we could clear up what needs to be done. What is the relationship between these terms? We have, from their various articles:

• "An accomplice is a person who actively participates in the commission of a crime, even though they take no part in the actual criminal offense"
• "An accessory is a person who assists in the commission of a crime, but who does not actually participate in the commission of the crime as a joint principal."
• "An individual is complicit in a crime if he/she is aware of its occurrence and has the ability to report the crime, but fails to do so. As such, the individual effectively allows criminals to carry out a crime despite possibly being able to stop them, either directly or by contacting the authorities, thus making the individual a de-facto accessory to the crime rather than an innocent bystander."

The articles are all written from at least an English-speaking bias. I am therefore asking for some references to back this up (I'm aware us RefDeskers will just give their views as they want, but some sources would be helpful!). There is a summary here of the US system of principals and accessories, but it fails to clarify the relationship between accessories and this accomplice/complicity thing. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 20:53, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

At common law accomplice liability had four types: principals in the first degree and principles in the second degree, and accessories before the fact and accessories after the fact. The key distinction then was whether they were present at the time of the crime or not. Presence at the crime was divided into principles in the first degree and principals in the second degree (those who aided but did not "by their hand" commit the crime). Today the principal in the second degree and accessory before the fact are just "accomplices". Accessories after the fact are not guilty of the crime; they're possibly guilty of separate crimes, like aiding and abetting or harboring.

These distinctions could vary depending on jurisdiction, and I don't know how non-U.S. jurisdictions use it, but that's my understanding of the basic structure. Accomplice is umbrella term for accessories. I don't know much about complicity, except that it's rare, and possibly on unclear constitutional ground. If you want sources to improve the article I would suggest a few law-treatises or hornbooks. ISBN 0735562431 would be a good choice, ISBN 0159007674, which you could probably read the relevant part off of Google Books. More in-depth treatises probably aren't necessary. Shadowjams (talk) 18:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

How is gorget pronounced?

Exactly as the title says. I thought this desk would be more likely to know than the Language desk.

I'd like IPA, ideally, so I can add it to the article. 86.161.108.172 (talk) 20:59, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh wait, I see Wiktionary says /ˈɡɔːdʒɪt/. Does that seem right? 86.161.108.172 (talk) 21:04, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Yup. The general rule is like Italian: hard ('k') before a, o, u; soft ('s') before e, i.--Wetman (talk) 23:59, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

We folk with rhotic accents pronounce the r, though. At least I do, and so does my Merriam-Webster's Collegiate. Deor (talk) 00:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't pronounce the t so just "gore-zhay" Any source besides us? 75.41.110.200 (talk) 01:58, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

That pronunciation would be appropriate if the word were a recent borrowing from modern French -- which it isn't... (In modern French, the word seems to be a semi-obscure architectural term.) -- AnonMoos (talk) 07:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

The OED Online says 'gɔːdʒɪt Pfly (talk) 07:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, in the UK I've only heard it with a pronounced "t" on the end (like "fillet"). Not that it comes up in conversation that often, you understand. Alansplodge (talk) 08:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

"Fillet" is an odd example to pick, because the Americans don't pronounce the T and the Brits do. Marnanel (talk) 13:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh yes; silly me. I was trying to find an example of a French word that has acquired an English pronunciation over the centuries. Alansplodge (talk) 13:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually, in American, the word which does not pronounce the final t is filet. Fillet does pronounce the t, but then, it's a different word altogether, having to do with ribbons, architecture and bookbinding. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 23:39, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Great, thanks. For the rhotic pronunciation, do I just need to add the upside-down r symbol thing in the right place? 86.161.108.172 (talk) 17:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I added it to the article, both in non-rhotic version and with a right-side-up 'r'. I hope that was right: I swear I've seen the upside-down 'r' more in English, and I thought I read something about English not really using the right-side-up 'r', but our Wikipedia:IPA for English article uses it. 86.161.108.172 (talk) 00:01, 3 September 2010 (UTC)