Humanities desk
< October 14	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 16 >

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.

October 15

Alianzarena, Munich

Resolved

I am going to Munich this weekend (21st to 25th) to visit a friend. I have two questions. First, besides Dachau which we will visit, are there any other places my fellow wikipedians can recommend? Secondly, she has tickets for the Alianzarena, but won't tell me what we are seeing. Does anyone know what's happening that weekend? --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 12:42, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1) Not Dachau, not Allianz Arena. 2) Soccer game TSV 1860 München : SC Paderborn. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 13:31, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When I was a kid, I had a copy of Miroslav Sasek's This is Munich; unfortunately I don't still have it, and neither Amazon nor Google Books has viewable pages. If you've never been there before, it's virtually inevitable that your friend will take you to the Frauenkirche. If you're a beer drinker, a visit to the Hofbräuhaus am Platzl is also de rigueur. Have you browsed Category:Visitor attractions in Munich to see what appeals to you? Pais (talk) 14:14, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've lived in Munich for 11 years. The art museums are quite good. See Alte Pinakothek, Neue Pinakothek, Pinakothek der Moderne. The Deutsches Museum is a world-class museum of science and technology. Also, the Englischer Garten should have lovely colours this time of the year. But for me, the main attraction was always the surroundings. If the weather is fine, take a trip to Starnberg and walk along the Starnberger See. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 14:27, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I second Stephan's answers, and definitely recommend the Deutsches Museum, even should you happen to lack scientific or technological inclinations. Also, look inside the Asamkirche. This concentration of late baroque opulence within such a small enclosed space is quite unusual (albeit not to everyone's taste or liking). ---Sluzzelin talk 15:12, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent answers, thanks! Just what I need! KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 00:00, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Small follow-up: If you are interested in academics and history, make a short stop at the old core of the Ludwigs-Maximilians-Universität on Leopoldstraße. The Ludwigskirche is quite striking, and at the Geschwister-Scholl-Platz you will find both a memorial and the very building the White Rose distributed leaflets and where ultimately caught by the Nazis. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 00:28, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Victorian water colour painter

Name George Arbuthnot. Born c.1803. Living in London 1829-1854. Who was he? Kittybrewster ☎ 13:46, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any cases of reverse-provocateur government agents?

So traditionally one of the tactics used to break up and destroy subversive groups is to infiltrate them with agent provocateurs. The provocateur will usually encourage and incite the group to become more radical, militant and extreme and urge the organization to commit outrageous acts of violence, which will both discredit the group among the general population and give the government a pretext to crack down and make arrests. In some cases provocateurs might even initiate violence alone in the name of the organization.

So my question is are there any cases of reverse-provocateurs? By which I mean government agents that infiltrate radical militant groups to stear them in a more peaceful, nonviolent, legal, moderate, reformist direction. So instead of encouraging a nonviolent group to become violent, these agents would attempt to drive the violent organization in a less violent direction.

It would seem like agents who encouraged subversive groups to engage in LESS illegal activities would be less likely to be detected as provocateurs, and such a tactic might be better for a longterm strategy of defusing radicalism from within, making them less of a direct violent/terroristic revolutionary threat to the state.

So if anyone knows any examples of government use of this tactic, either from history or contemporary politics please let me know. --Gary123 (talk) 13:54, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the goal of law enforcement is generally to discredit and disband such groups, so the strategy you're talking about isn't really amenable to that mindset. But in the intelligence community you do have things like this, such as the CIA's funding of the Congress for Cultural Freedom, which was generally meant to have a "liberal" (as opposed to "radical") approach to Europeans, who were perceived as particularly likely to be sucked in by Soviet propaganda during the Cold War. It wasn't so much that they paid people to try and influence towards liberalism (and against Communism) as that they funded people who happened to already believe that in the first place, and give them a mouthpiece. Other than that, though, I can't think of any comparable examples. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:59, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't there some white power skinhead group which was being infiltrated by cops in the 1990s out in the midwest U.S. somewhere? 208.54.38.200 (talk) 16:34, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where to buy Kippot in the Czech Republic?

Where can kippot be bought in the Czech Republic either online or in person?--147.32.97.254 (talk) 18:06, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't know about buying them in person, but I suspect there are some Jewish stores in Prague. As for online, I guess you could use a site like [1] (they've been okay in the past). Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 17 Tishrei 5772 18:09, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I think about it, check local synagogues, they would definitely know where you can buy kippot and some probably have Judaica stores that would sell them. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 17 Tishrei 5772 18:12, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Old New Synagogue is the only one still active on that list though. >.< But wait, I have found something else! Chabad of Prague [2] 'Chabad of Prague • Parizska 3 • Praha 1, 11000 • Czech Republic • 420-222-320-200/192 -- Tefillin, Mezuzot and other Judaica items are available at Chabad. Please call +420 222 320 200.' If they have those, there is no doubt that they have kippot! Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 17 Tishrei 5772 18:20, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, you are probably right. I just found that website very confusing (in all languages, Czech and Hebrew included) and skipped over it entirely. I'll be sure to go soon.--147.32.97.254 (talk) 19:24, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know, it is poorly designed, but I thankfully noticed that stuff at the bottom. !חג שמח (Happy holiday!)

Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 17 Tishrei 5772 19:29, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brechova, where Shelanu Deli is located, is a short extension from Maiselova. Walk from the main square of the Old Town straight up Parizska (sorry, no háčeks on this keyboard apart from copy and paste) and turn left into Bilkova. Alternatively, from the Staromestska metro walk up 17. listopadu and turn right. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:51, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Il Canzoniere

I know it is obvious to some, but I seem to have missed the meaning of the "II". Is it because it is to be broken up into two words?--Doug Coldwell ^talk 18:25, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Canzoniere" would simply be song book. "Il Canzoniere" is the song book. It's just a Definite article. SDY (talk) 18:45, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the sans-serif font has misled you. It isn't the Roman numeral II. It's a capital eye followed by a lowercase ell, pronounced (approximately) eel. --Trovatore (talk) 18:50, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, now I get it. The sans-serif font did throw me off. It has NOTHING to do with the Roman numeral II.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 18:58, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some good screen fonts, including Verdana and Segoe UI, put serifs on capital eyes despite otherwise being sans-serif fonts, thus eliminating this kind of confusion. Angr (talk) 06:41, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cottage cheese in Israel

A while back, I read a news article regarding popular protests in Israel about cost of living, and cottage cheese came up as a specific bone of contention. Is there some particular reason this is ingrained in Israeli culture? I had a couple of Orthodox friends growing up, and none of them seemed particularly taken by the stuff. SDY (talk) 18:47, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cottage cheese touched it off. Israelis love six types of food: Fish, Dairy, Cucumbers, anything made from chickpea, Tomatoes and Bread. I think there was some price fixing going on between the dairy companies like Tnuva and prices of cheese and other dairy products skyrocketed. Oh yeah, and I believe that another reason for the high prices was that, in the realm of dairy, Israel is very protectionist and does not allow dairy imports; or didn't until the protests, and I believe this was after several Israeli grocery stores said they would stop carrying Tnuva's products if they didn't lower the prices as the stores were apparently selling them for little or no profit. A lot of politics though. So, people got incredibly pissed off and it eventually evolved into a protest over many other things including government corruption, monopolies and high cost of living. I don't quite remember how it transitioned though, but that was an epic protest. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 17 Tishrei 5772 19:16, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good info, but why cottage cheese in particular? Our article on the product doesn't give any background on the history of it other than the curds and whey. It more or less doesn't exist in India, so it's not a universal dairy food. I'm thinking Hawaiians and spam: it's a traditional food because there weren't many other meat options. Paneer has an additional quality that some cottage cheese shares, which is lack of rennet, and is that appealing from a standpoint of kashrut? SDY (talk) 21:15, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cottage cheese is one of those foodstuffs which many cultures (at least, those that eat dairy) have arrived at independently; many have different names for it, and slightly different applications and preparation techniques, but most dairy-consuming cultures have a fresh, unaged cheese product. (besides the aforementioned Paneer, there is also things like Farmer's cheese and Queso fresco, and Quark (cheese) and so on). In Israel, apparently, it is a staple foodstuff; I'm not sure there needs to be a causitive agent for its popularity. Why do Italians eat pasta? Why do the Irish drink dark, warm beer? Why do Asian cultures use soy sauce? It just is... --Jayron32 23:35, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, as usual I ignored the most obvious answer. The main reason Israelis were so pissed off was because the price increase was completely and totally unreasonable to them. Israelis hate, and I mean hate, feeling like someone is taking advantage of them, to be considered a fraier (sucker, chump) is horrible (the only thing worse is to be called out as the person taking advantage of someone). The fact is that if an Israeli sees the price of something like cheese go up by 53% in the course of one month (I think that was it), he or she is going to be pissed because he or she feels that someone is trying to play him or her for a chump. It's not so much the cost or the love of cheese as the principle and no Israeli willingly takes such things lying down. Statements vetted and confirmed by Israeli girlfriend Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 18 Tishrei 5772 05:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OT but how much is cottage cheese in Israel? It's not actually something I like much but I recently bought some and it was NZ$1.99 for 250g albeit on special. Of course NZ has a large dairy industry but we do get common complaints about the price of dairy products particularly milk. Nil Einne (talk) 16:11, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cottage cheese is a staple part of Israeli breakfasts, if not the main element. In the UK, it would perhaps be comparable to the cost of breakfast cereal rising by 50% in a month. --Dweller (talk) 09:47, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's an article on the cottage cheese boycott... AnonMoos (talk) 10:49, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"professional, dedicated, highly skilled and resilient"

According to Mike Jackson, the British Army's Chief of the General Staff, as the article Provisional Irish Republican Army campaign 1969–1997 points out, the Provisional IRA was "professional, dedicated, highly skilled and resilient". Where can I read the paper (by Jackson) wherein he described the IRA as being like that? --Belchman (talk) 19:39, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Banner released under FOI [3] The Last Angry Man (talk) 20:00, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you! --Belchman (talk) 20:57, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

silk road

What countries did the silk road go through and what goods were traded? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.92.76.13 (talk) 21:43, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please, see Silk Road. --Belchman (talk) 22:28, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why didn't Derry/Londonderry join the Republic of Ireland during the partition?

Why didn't it? Its population is mostly Catholic and nationalist. --Belchman (talk) 23:01, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to the relevant articles including Irish Boundary Commission and Partition of Ireland areas which were otherwise majority Catholic and Nationalist, including (London)Derry, were included on the northeast side of the border for primarily economic reasons: If the border were drawn on purely sectarian lines (i.e. fully seperating only those areas which were Protestant and Unionist into Northern Ireland), then the Northern Irish area would not have been economically viable. --Jayron32 23:25, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, checking those articles. Also, fixed a spelling mistake. --Belchman (talk) 23:37, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it's the largest city in the northwest of Ireland, and has been considered by some to be a kind of Protestant holy city after the events of 1689. AnonMoos (talk) 09:33, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The border decided in 1920 was provisional, to be adjusted by a Boundary Commission, which was appointed in 1924. Its report recommended transferring some parts of Northern Ireland to the Free State, as it then was, and some parts of County Donegal to Northern Ireland, but it was suppressed for a variety of reasons - mainly because the Irish government traded it for removal of liability for a proportion of the UK's public debt, which had been included in the 1920 treaty, but also because they felt it would entrench partition and make it harder to one day get rid of entirely. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As Anonmoos says, the symbolism of the place was a MAJOR factor. The 1689 Siege of Londonderry is seen as a defining moment in the Protestant mindset. The 13 Apprentice Boys who closed the gates to the Catholic James II, are commemorated annually. The answer to the King's ultimatum "Surrender or die" was "No surrender!", which has been the rallying call of the Ulster Protestants ever since[4][5][6]. Surrendering Londonderry to the Free State in 1920 would have been a disaster in the eyes of every Loyalist. Alansplodge (talk) 08:09, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another factor - our article, The Troubles in Derry says: "Although Catholics were a clear majority of the Derry population, severe gerrymandering meant that unionists controlled the city government". Alansplodge (talk) 10:15, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All of that is true, but since the Northern Ireland government took no part in the Boundary Commission and played no part that I know of in suppressing its report, I'm not sure how relevant it is. Besides, Unionists are quite happy to celebrate the Battle of the Boyne while the Boyne is entirely in the Republic. --Nicknack009 (talk) 12:09, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, but I suspect that the Commission would have known what would have been grudgingly accepted by both sides, and what would have been likely to start a civil war. "Then fight and don't surrender / But come when duty calls, / With heart and hand and sword and shield / We'll guard old Derry's Walls." Alansplodge (talk) 12:56, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant chapter from The Making of a Minority: Political Developments in Derry and the North 1912-25 by Colm Fox (1997) can be seen here. The crux of the matter seems to be as follows: "The claims that the city should become part of the Irish Free State were opposed on the grounds that the greater part of the trade of the city and its port was with Northern Ireland and that the city was linked economically with the Protestant districts of the East. These last points were decisive for Judge Feetham, who invoked the 'so far as may be compatible with economic and geographic conditions' clause of Article 12, maintaining that those conditions would take precedence over the 'wishes of the inhabitants'." Alansplodge (talk) 17:40, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

David & Karina Calvert-Jones

What are the names of their two children? Living in Los Angeles. Possibly in birth announcements in Australia. Kittybrewster ☎ 23:29, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Women in old Russia before seclusion

I know that before the Western reforms issued by Peter the Great in the early 18th century, Russian women lived secluded life's, at least in the upper classes, were they were not allowed to mingle with men. My question is, when were they secluded like this in the first place? Surely, they could not have been secluded in old Kievan Rus', as it was influenced by the Swedish culture, were women were not secluded? Or was it? Perhaps Kievan Rus were not influenced by Swedish culture, or not to that degree? If women were not secluded in Kievan Rus, then when were they placed in the seclusion from which they were freed by Peter the Great? Was it under the influence of the Golden Horde? Thank you.--Aciram (talk) 23:35, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am not familiar with this in Russians per se, the practice here is attributed to a development even beyond Mongol and Byzantine influence, but Purdah was a common Indo-European practice also known in Persia, india, and among the Greeks. Indo-Europeans themselves, the Slavs were influenced by the Greeks and the Aryan relatives of the Persians. It is doubtful that the Ruotsi brought that many women along with them and probably took native brides--but that's a guess on my part. μηδείς (talk) 00:41, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's very doubtful whether it should be called an "Indo-European practice", since it was definitely not practiced by the speakers of the original Proto-Indo-European language, and there are whole branches of the Indo-European languages whose speakers have never practiced it.

It actually originated in the urban civilizations of the middle east. However, it seems to have been systematized and intensified in Achaemenid Persia, and it was the Persians who were most influential in transmitting the custom to other nations or civilizations... AnonMoos (talk)

As far as I understand, the women of India were not secluded before Islam? In any case, perhaps it is best to determine when the seclusion was first practiced in Russia? Were the Grand Princesses of Kiev secluded? And if not all, who was the first one of them to live in seclusion? Were the women secluded in the 11th century, in the 12th century, or in the 13th century Russia? If it was byzantine influence, then perhaps it was introduced by the Byzantine marriage and Christianisation of the Grand duke in 988? In short, when did the practice start? When is the first time were this practice is observed in Russia? And when is the last time when the women were not secluded? It was definitely in full practice in the 15th century, when Sophia Palaiologina was exempted from it. --Aciram (talk) 11:07, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as I said the one book source I could find said that the seclusion of Muscovite women became more severe over time. I don't have an opinion of the source, having only seen it on google. I should say that there is no Indo-European word meaning "purdah" or "seclusion" in the strict sense. But, the seclusion of wives among the Greco-Aryans; the fact that the word "wed" and its analogs in other branches means "to lead away"; the fact that PIE kin terms are patrilocal; while evidence of Old Europe (archaeology) shows the opposite practice; the likelihood that the Latin word uxor comes from a root with a meaning "to become accustomed" (i.e., to one's role); the fact that the Romans found the equality with which the Etruscans treated their women suprising, while the Romans had such cults as the Vestal Virgins; the suggested etymology of wife from a verb *weip meaing "to wrap, enveil"; and many other things all imply a secluded role for wives in the culture of the Kurgan expansionists. μηδείς (talk) 02:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I don't really find that credible. The proto-Indo-European speakers were no doubt somewhat patriarchal in their own particular way, but their fairly mobile lifestyle (often more attached to their animals than to any particular plot of land) was not conducive to any type of strict segregation, and if they lived significantly north of the Caucasus mountain range (as seems most plausible), then they were too far away from urban civilizations to be directly influenced by them. Furthermore, it's quite dubious whether the English word "wife" goes back to Indo-European, and the attested early Germanic forms of this word don't really mean "married woman" anyway. And a source I have here explains the etymology of uxor as meaning "she who gets accustomed (to the new household)", implying patrilocal marriage customs, but not purdah. (In any case, in a society with purdah, a woman who went from seclusion in her father's household to seclusion in her husband's household would not have to become accustomed to purdah...) And the Greco-Aryan article describes what seems to be a rather speculative hypothesis. AnonMoos (talk) 06:06, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Graeco-Armeno-Aryan is rather mainstream and quite well supported by such things as the augment, the me negative, common vocabulary and morphological phenomena. Gamkrelidze and Ivanov support it as does Mallory, apparently. The only real problem seems to be that Greek alone among them is a Centum dialect, but that is not unsurmountable. Your comment that the uxor wouldn't have to get used to purdah is flippant. The object to which she would have to conform would be the husband's household. μηδείς (talk) 17:14, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And having to accustom herself to her husband's household is evidence of patrilocal marriage customs, but not evidence for purdah as such. Of the three components of the claimed Greco-Armeno-Aryan group, the Greeks had locally-varying degrees of seclusion, the Armenians were subject to strong early and continuing Persian influence, while among Indic-language speakers purdah seems to have been greatly strengthened by external influences. The economical hypothesis is that speakers of Proto-Indo-European, while likely somewhat patriarchal in some ways, did not practice any strict seclusion of women. AnonMoos (talk) 00:35, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. The degree of seclusion among the ancient Greeks seems to have varied significantly among different city-states, and Herodotus' fellow-Halicarnassian Artemisia I of Caria famously fought in the battle of Salamis as a reigning queen, etc. Some might say that if there are publicly-recognized queen-consorts in a society (as in Byzantium and Muscovy), then that's not a full implementation of purdah -- since in the system as practiced by the Abbasids (who were significantly Persianized in certain customs) and Ottomans, there was nothing that could be called a public "queen" role at all (with the exception of the mother of the reigning monarch occasionally waving from distant balconies at male ceremonies going on below), and names of "respectable" women were rarely mentioned officially in public or recorded in histories, unless they became involved in crimes or in semi-disreputable incidents where they were considered to be transgressing the accepted feminine role... AnonMoos (talk) 11:48, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Artemisia I of Caria was not entirely Greek but a Carian. In any case, that is not an answer to the question. Can we establish that there was no seclusion in Russia before the Golden Horde in the 13th century, or can't we? Was for example the Grand princess of Kiev Ingegerd Olofsdotter of Sweden secluded or was she not? --Aciram (talk) 12:36, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The fact remains that the practice has been common among Indo-Europeans, whether or not it was practiced by the earliest Proto-Indo-Europeans themselves. (The complaint that mobile societies can't practice some version of purdah is belied by the example of the Mongols themselves.) There is also the ancient practice of bride-kidnapping to look at, although that hardly seems relevant in the casr of Moscow.

It was mainly practiced by speakers of those branches of the Indo-European language family which ended up being spoken in areas subject to significant influences from early middle-eastern urban civilizations and/or the strong secondary center of diffusion in Persia. I really don't think that there's any particular or special affinity of speakers of Indo-European languages for purdah (beyond that shown by speakers of other language groups in comparable historical circumstances). I don't know much about Mongol customs, but I suspect that they may have been subject to influences from China -- and I'm not sure how the quasi-subsistence lifestyle in harsh conditions which the Mongols led while living in Mongolia would have allowed for strict female seclusion, unless among a small aristocratic/royal elite only... AnonMoos (talk) 21:23, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All evidence is that the area of spread of the late PIE Graeco-Armeno-Aryans was the steppe north of the Caucasus, not the Middle East. See also Ossetian language and the superstratum influence on Slavic and Finno-Ugrian, giving such results as Bog for Gog in Slavic. (I would look to the Northwest Caucasian languages to see if they provide an influence.) None of this is conclusive but it indicates areas of research for the OP. μηδείς (talk) 21:43, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but what is the specific evidence (separate from general linguistic relationships) that the social custom of purdah also spread from the steppe north of the Caucasus (rather than from the middle-east, and later also Persia)? AnonMoos (talk) 22:36, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In short, a number of groups who happened to speak Indo-European languages have also adopted purdah -- but there's no real evidence that I've seen for a special Indo-European/purdah connection or affinity, or evidence of purdah among Indo-European speakers in the pre-Bronze era, and it probably would be difficult to find reputable modern scholars who claim that it's an "Indo-European custom"... AnonMoos (talk) 22:55, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]