Humanities desk
< November 27	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 29 >

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.

November 28

2012 Campaign Question

Can anyone link me to any sources online that give the total amount of money spent on internet ads in the 2012 U.S. Presidential election?Rabuve (talk) 15:38, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Federal Election Commission has some data on how the candidates spend their money: http://www.fec.gov/portal/presidential.shtml, but I'm not sure if it specifically lists internet advertising apart from other types. RudolfRed (talk) 16:13, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Web search "romney obama internet ad spending" finds lots of data, which I think can be summarized as "Obama spent more". 67.119.3.105 (talk) 19:11, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First European to cross the equator

(1) Was Bartolomeu Dias the first European to cross the equator? If not, then who?

(2) Our article Bartolomeu Dias#Purposes of the Dias expedition says

King John II of Portugal appointed him, on 10 October 1487, to head an expedition to sail around the southern tip of Africa in the hope of finding a trade route to India.

At that time did Europeans know for sure that there was a southern tip of Africa? Duoduoduo (talk) 19:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1) Marco Polo may have crossed the equator, because he describes islands in Indonesia that are "so far to the south that the North Star, little or much, is never to be seen!" and that he himself was "detained by the weather" for five month on such an island in the Kingdom of Samara (Sumatra) where "neither the Pole-star nor the stars of the Maestro were to be seen".

2) There is a story recorded by Herodotus claiming that the ancient Phoenicians sailed around southern Africa, and there may have been other accounts. And besides, the only alternative of there being a southern tip is if Africa extended to the South Pole, and then it had to be huge. Not impossible perhaps, but that might have seemed unlikely. - Lindert (talk) 19:47, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tips about Marco Polo and Herodotus. I was wondering whether there's documentary evidence of, say, Bartolomeu Dias' sponsors saying that the southern tip of Africa must exist, or telling him to find it "if it does exist". (As a practical matter they could view it as non-existent if the coast of West Africa veers toward the west as you go farther south.) Duoduoduo (talk)

I think it's really unlikely that we can figure out who was the first European to cross the Equator. My guess would be it was someone whose name is lost to history, not more than 300 years after there were Europeans. There have always been wanderers, and it's not really that hard to wander to. --Trovatore (talk) 21:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But surely we could identify the first one known to have done it. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:27, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The first European known to cross the equator would be Marco Polo, assuming he wasn’t fudging the facts (which would seem unlikely given the rather limited understanding even the most educated people had about the particulars of latitude and the like in the early 14th century). Regarding the Herodotus claim, it’s not entirely germane to this discussion, but similar claims were made by ~~Plutarch~~ Ptolemy about the Egyptians; I don’t think anyone takes those too seriously these days. Dias had enough trouble getting around Cape Bojador as it is, and it seems likely that had he been trying it with 14th-century technology (let alone ancient Egyptian or Phoenician tech) he would have died like many of the others who had tried before (remember that the Cape of Good Hope wasn’t even the hardest part of getting to the other side of Africa). Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:54, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it might be germane to this discussion, because the second question was "did Europeans know for sure that there was a southern tip of Africa?". Answer - maybe, if they'd studied Herodotus. He was thought to be a reliable source at the time, so at least they would have thought that they knew for sure. Alansplodge (talk) 22:08, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IIRC, the Geography, along with a smattering of other classical and early medieval works, portray the Indian Ocean as a massive lake bounded by Africa on the west and an overgrown Malay Peninsula on the east. Herodotus was much more well-known than Ptolemy in the 14th and 15th centuries, however, so you may be correct here. Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:30, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

However, even Herodotus himself expressed doubt about the story, even though he includes it. (link) - Lindert (talk) 22:20, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If the Egyptians did it, it was probably by following the Nile or the Red Sea, not by sailing into the Atlantic and south along the western coast. Also, a 14th century traveler would have certainly been aware that the farther south you go, the lower the North Star appears, until it disappears behind the horizon. --140.180.249.151 (talk) 22:10, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ptolemy's claim was that they went out through the Pillars of Hercules, so do with that what you will. Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:30, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Pole Star -- while medieval Europeans certainly would have known that the Pole Star sunk toward the horizon as one travels south, they didn't necessarily know that it would disappear upon reaching the equator, nor were they at all certain that the equator was even habitable (Lester 2009). Unfortunately, Torrid zone is a redirect to Tropics at the moment. Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:29, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Duoduoduo -- for a lot of information on what 15th-century Europeans thought they might find in distant regions, see The Fourth Part of the World by Toby Lester (ISBN 978-1-4165-3531-7). -- AnonMoos (talk) 22:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I highly recommend Lester's book for anyone interested in early European exploration. Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The story by Herodotus about Phoenician navigators is not completely dismissed by scholars, as some details suggest that it might be accurate, but of course the Phoenicians were not European, nor were the Egyptians. My namesake, Marco Polo, is not certain to have passed south of the Equator. The farthest south he is fairly certain to have reached is Singapore, which is just north of the Equator. He says that the North Star was not visible, but it may have been just above the horizon where he didn't recognize it. There's no way to be sure that he sailed farther south than Singapore, which was as far south as his ship needed to travel. The first Europeans that I think we can be certain traveled south of the Equator were João de Santarém and Pêro Escobar, who discovered São Tomé and Príncipe in 1470 or 1471. Marco polo (talk) 22:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But the article São Tomé and Príncipe says São Tomé, the sizable southern island, is situated just north of the equator. On the other hand, the article equator says in its chart that the equator goes through São Tomé and Príncipe. So: (1) how can we be certain João de Santarém and Pêro Escobar crossed the equator -- are they known to have gone beyond São Tomé and Príncipe? And (2) the two articles São Tomé and Príncipe and equator seem to contradict each other -- which is right? Duoduoduo (talk) 22:29, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If Google Earth is to be trusted, the main island of São Tomé a is just north of the equator (Principe is further north), but a small island, (Ilhéu das Rolas just south of São Tomé) does lie on the equator, as its article confirms. - Lindert (talk) 22:43, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Given this doubt, we could certainly not say that João de Santarém and Pêro Escobar are known to have crossed the Equator. The honour must go to someone else. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Age of Discovery#Portuguese Exploration after Prince Henry says

explorers João de Santarém, Pedro Escobar, Lopo Gonçalves, Fernão do Pó, and Pedro de Sintra made it even beyond the hired (sic). They reached the southern Hemisphere and the islands of the Gulf of Guinea, including São Tomé and Príncipe and Elmina on the Gold Coast in 1471. [bolding added]

Duoduoduo (talk) 20:02, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That may well be the case, but it is currently an unreferenced statement from a Wikipedia article, so not really authoratative, especially because none of the places mentioned is actually south of the equator. - Lindert (talk) 20:13, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An additional note: Marco Polo claimed to have seen "neither the Pole-star nor the stars of the Maestro". I don't know what the Maestro is, but presumably it's a part of the Big Dipper, in which case he could not have been just a bit above the equator and failed to recognize the Pole Star. Polaris itself would have been 5 degrees away from the pole in 1300, meaning 5 degrees above the horizon at the equator at its maximum. That's 10 times the angular diameter of the Moon or Sun. --140.180.249.151 (talk) 22:59, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you discount Polo, de Santarém, and Escobar, then Lopes Gonçalves might be the first European of whom it can be said without any doubt that he crossed the equator (in 1474). ---Sluzzelin talk 23:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly the right answer, but I think the first person to visit both Europe and South of the Equator was the Moroccan explorer Ibn Battuta, who ranged as far north as the Balkans and as far south as Zanzibar. --Jayron32 02:36, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, i agree Duoduoduo's question #1 as posed. You might actually say that della Casa the first European to cross the equator in that his expedition is sort of the starting point for our use of the term "European" at all. Before the sixteenth century CE, the people living on the European continent would not have responded to the question "where are you from" with a continent. Rather they would have self-identified and identified others of by religion, language or locality. What was understood to be common to the entire area was religion (Christendom), a legal system (inherited from Rome) and a set of origin myths harkening back to what we would call classical antiquity (Hercules, Troy, and Brutus). A twelfth-century man living in what is now Belgium, if asked where he lived, would likely have responded "Christendom" or "Rome," not "Europe." A good overview of this topic that i have read is chapter one of Garrett Mattingly's excellent if now-dated monograph Renaissance Diplomacy". From a non-European perspective, the Ottomans in the 16th century referred to themselves as Rus (Roman) and some Turkish dialects, according to the entry Europe, the word Frangistan is casually used to refer to Europe outside of official institutions. Translators of the native peoples' descriptions of the migrants associated with crusades generally [this one)]render the terms they wrote in as "Franks," but i have no idea why they make that choice. I believe that the term actually only became into use after men like Della Casa changed how we conceive of the distribution of people across our planet. Or, i could have just cited the Europe#Etymology page. Sigh...Hfeatherina (talk) 05:53, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another possibility, though falling into the "we'll probably never know for sure" category, is Eudoxus of Cyzicus. It seems the ancient Greeks at least knew about Zanzibar, which is south of the equator and mentioned in the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, an ancient Greek sailing guide. Pfly (talk) 11:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hfeatherina, the Europeans who lived in the crusader states are generally referred to as "Franks" because, when they themselves were at a loss to describe themselves, that's what they used, rather than "Europeans" because, as you say, that term didn't exist yet. They tended to come from France anyway, and when they didn't come directly from France, they probably came from Norman Italy or England, thus they were actually from Normandy in the previous generations. It also recalls an earlier age when the actual Germanic Franks ruled Europe, and almost all of the crusaders were descended from Charlemagne in one way or another. Muslim authors like Usama ibn Munqidh, whom you linked to, called them Franks too, and that is the ultimate origin of names like "Frangistan". The Greeks adopted the term too (as in "Frankocratia", when crusaders conquered the Byzantine Empire). Modern historians also sometimes use "Franks" as a convenient shorthand for the inhabitants of the crusader states, because "crusaders" is not really accurate (they weren't all literally crusaders), and "Christians" is too broad (there were other kinds of Christians there). We also use "Latins" (another name they called themselves). Adam Bishop (talk) 12:24, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adam, many of the Crusaders came from Flanders too. I forgot about Latins, but that would be another example of their self-identification by language rather than geographic area, wouldn't it? Hfeatherina (talk) 18:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

True, crusaders also came from Frisia, and Norway, and Poland, and everywhere, even as far as Iceland. Latin was a language identification, presumably - as opposed to Greeks, and the various other languages spoken in the Middle East. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:41, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It basically meant Latin rite Christians... AnonMoos (talk) 00:46, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

de-law-ification

Is there a generic term for "de-lawification", i.e. making a law stop having legal force? If it's done by a legislative act, it's called "repeal", and if it's done by a court nullifying a statute, I've seen the term "struck down". But there are other situations, like the law expiring (sunset provision), a jurisdictional change (the northernmost part of California hypothetically becoming part of Oregon would make California law stop having effect in that region), or case law created by a court later being overruled by a court (perhaps the same court). The example prompting this question is Lawrence v. Texas "de-lawified" Bowers v. Hardwick. "Overruled" or "overturned" isn't what I'm looking for. I want to refer to the effect on the law itself. 67.119.3.105 (talk) 23:15, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about a verb, but I would say "the law is no longer in force". BTW, may I suggest the Language Desk ? StuRat (talk) 23:46, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Annulled? Abrogated? Deor (talk) 11:37, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Repeal. Matt Deres (talk) 11:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OP is asking for a general word that covers repealing legislation, overruling legislation, overturning judgments, reception and withdrawal of laws due to change of jurisdiction, as well as expiry of legislation due to effluxion of time. I'm not sure such a word exists, since these examples cover at elast three or four fundamentally different situations. The only thing common to all of these that I can think of is that there has been a "change of law". --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 15:06, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As for the specific example the OP mentioned, the word you are looking for is probably "overturn". While we say Court A overruled Court B, and Court A overturned Court B's judgment in Case X, it is also okay to say "Court A overturned legal principle Y". As I understand your explanation, you are looking for a way of describing the effect on the law rather than on a specific case. It is perfectly acceptable to say that the legal principle in question has been overturned. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 15:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Overturned" doesn't really work for, say, expiration due to a sunset provison, nor for legislative repeal. How about something like "lose currency"? Actually I like the OP's wording "stop having legal force", or "lose legal force". Duoduoduo (talk) 20:09, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suggested "overturned" for the OP's specific example of what happens to a legal rule established by case law if it is overturned by a court, I am not suggesting that "overturned" works for any of the other examples.

"Loses legal force" works well for legislation but it isn't quite apt for some types of legal principles based on case law, since you can't really say that, say, "the doctrine of terra nullius is in force" or "is no longer in force". It either exists or it doesn't (or it is either recognised by a court or it isn't). --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 13:41, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Ceased to have effect"? "Spent"? "Obsolete"? Gabbe (talk) 14:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hazara dominated provinces of Afghanistan

So far, I know that there are three provinces that are Hazara-dominated and one of them is Bamyan. who are the other two? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donmust90 (talk • contribs) 23:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Our article Hazarajat, about the homeland of the Hazara, says "It is made up of the three central provinces of Bamyan and Daykundi and includes large areas of Maidan Wardak, Helmand, Ghazni, Orūzgān, Sar-e Pol, Samangan, Ghowr and Parvan provinces", which doesn't actually make sense. Rojomoke (talk) 23:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Go back far enough in the article history and it used to say "Bamyan, Daykundi and Ghor". Rojomoke (talk) 23:50, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's strange. I thought it was Bamyan, Daykundi and Ghazni and I ask this question because I totally forgot this fact sine 5 years.