Humanities desk
< April 16	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 18 >

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.

April 17

Could the Egyptian pyramids have been painted on the outside?

OK, I know that they were originally surfaced by white casing stones made of highly polished white limestone. In all descriptions and visualizations of what the pyramids might have looked like originally that I've seen, the limestone was left as was, producing a big white, shining surface. But wouldn't it have been possible that this surface was used as a giant canvas to be covered with mutlicolored wall paintings? After all, the pyramids were painted inside, so why not outside? Now, if it ever was the case, then all evidence is probably gone; the paintwork would have been worn away by wind and sand before the casing stones themselves were removed. But is there any evidence that the casing stones were definitely not painted? Or has there been any educated speculation as to whether they could have been possibly painted and what the design might have been? — Kpalion^(talk) 07:44, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You'd have to consider the huge amount of paint they'd need to paint such big structures. Do we know if the Egyptians were able to produce paint in massive quantities? 2001:18E8:2:28CA:F000:0:0:CB89 (talk) 14:43, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Pyramids (in particular the Great Pyramid of Cheops) were from the outset hugely impressive and much visited, and many writers from other (non-Egyptian) cultures described them, just as they did the other six of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. Many described the white casing, and presumably none (in accounts known to us directly, or quoted by other writers) mentioned any traces of painting, or this would be well known to us today. While absence of evidence is not strictly evidence of absence, I think the absence in this case is suggestive.

In addition, one might expect that a soft material like limestone would absorb and retain some of any pigments used, and that these would be detectable on some of the stones that were later incorporated into other buildings and are available for analysis today. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 17:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the pyramids were made to last for thousands of years, and they would know the paint would quickly chip off if exposed to sandstorms. So, either they would have to repaint it constantly or it would look like crap in short order. StuRat (talk) 17:22, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As in Super Mario Brothers 3, the sun would be an even more constant nuisance than the sand. Better to burn out than fade away, eh? InedibleHulk (talk) 02:17, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Besides, the pyramids were not, for a long time, painted on the inside. Almost all the royal tomb painting you're likely to see in photos comes from the rock-cut tombs in the Valley of the Kings, which the rulers of the New Kingdom used instead of pyramids. The interior of the Pyramid of Djoser, the earliest of all, contains some relief art, but I don't know whether it was originally painted. Pyramids from the Fourth and Fifth Dynasties—which include all the best-known pyramids other than Djoser's—had bare walls. Unas, the last king of the Fifth Dynasty, and his Sixth Dynasty successors, did have painting in the burial chambers, and the hieroglyphs on the walls of the other chambers were painted in blue or green. (I don't know if Middle Kingdom pyramids had decorated interiors; a lot of them weren't well-built enough for any part to survive.) A pyramid was only part of a large complex, and most of the artwork was reserved for the pyramid temple that lay at the foot of the pyramid, for the causeway that ran from the pyramid temple down to the river, and for the valley temple at the bottom of the causeway.

The pyramid casing wasn't necessarily plain white, though. The hieroglyph for a pyramid was often colored with a red band across the bottom. According to The Art of Ancient Egypt by Gay Robins, the bottom courses of the casing on the Pyramid of Khafre were made of red granite instead of limestone. The book's illustration of what the Giza Necropolis would have looked like at its height shows the Pyramid of Menkaure with a much larger red band—about a third of the pyramid's total height. A. Parrot (talk) 18:05, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all, and especially A. Parrot for a very informative answer. — Kpalion^(talk) 08:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Russell Senate Office Building

Is it possible to drive a vehicle into the Russell Building's courtyard, and/or to have it propelled into the courtyard whole? That is, if you're doing it for official purposes, not just a person on the street. Trailers can get in the courtyard, but maybe they have to take them apart and put them back together again, or maybe they have to pick it up and lower it with a helicopter. 2001:18E8:2:28CA:F000:0:0:CB89 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's an archway entrance that's pretty apparent from the satellite view in Google Maps - look on First St. between Constitution and C, the concrete on part of the sidewalk is the same color as the turnaround circle inside the courtyard. Can't see it in street view for obvious reasons, but it's clearly there. ☯.Zen Swashbuckler.☠ 16:26, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I saw that part but thought it was just a spot where they built a pediment-crowned portico, but you're right about the concrete color and about it being a turnaround spot. 2001:18E8:2:28CA:F000:0:0:CB89 (talk) 19:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ice cream and beer consumption versus income

I'm looking for data on ice cream and beer consumption per capita versus income in the US or Canada. Google hasn't been much help so I decided to ask here. 74.15.136.155 (talk) 14:41, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm.... beer. This one is from the 1970s: Old beer. I scream, you scream, we all scream for ice cream. More ice cream: [1]. Beer good, ice cream good, just not together please... --Jayron32 14:46, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree almost entirely. Thanks for the beer PDF; I note one major factor it doesn't take into account is the type of beer drunk. While it looks a little at beer generally versus wine and/or spirits, the study takes no note of the dizzying variety (and increased cost) of much higher-quality beers available now (as opposed to at the beginning of its dataset in the 1970s). The plural of "anecdote" is not "data," but as my finances have gotten shakier since ~2008 (or maybe since I'm getting older?), I've spent a lot less on craft/microbrews (even though they're my drink of choice bar none) and more on the least-offensive macrobrews (as well as cutting back on drinking in toto). ☯.Zen Swashbuckler.☠ 16:18, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Examples of LGBT Christian evangelization

I am just wondering, because I recently saw a picket sign that condemned homosexuality. In my head, I thought, "Hmmm... I wonder if LGBT Christians evangelize this way. But instead of the condemnation of homosexuality, the picket sign would say 'God is love' or 'Homophobia is a sin'." Are there any examples of LGBT Christian evangelization? 140.254.227.99 (talk) 17:41, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Type phrases into Google to get examples. Typing "Homophobia is a sin" gets plenty of hits. This is the first such hit. --Jayron32 18:18, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Today I saw this [2] from a trans man who is an Old Catholic priest in Minnesota - I think it's a pretty good example from the more traditionalist end of LGBT Christian activism. AlexTiefling (talk) 00:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Those sorts of signs show up at counter-protests to the sort of anti-LGBT events you describe. I've also seen churches set up booths at pride events to let people know they'll be welcome there. Katie R (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to remember a short story . .?

I am looking for a short story I had to read in high school:

A man on the beach daydreams about a girl he knew when he was a child — a kind of first crush — and comes to believe that he is still in love with her. When he "awakens" from this daydream, he looks at his wife as if she is a stranger.

It may have been by Ray Bradbury, but I'm not sure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snoopies622 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I very vaguely remember something similar, and I'm also inclined to think it was Bradbury. I remember a lake, rather than a(n oceanfront) beach. The girl drowned, didn't she? It's possible we're remembering two different stories. Evan ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:15, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I believe you're both (certainly Evanh2008 is) thinking of the story "The Lake" in The October Country. (I won't link to it, since it's no doubt a copyvio, but a PDF of the story appears as the top hit when I Google "The Lake" Bradbury.) Deor (talk) 12:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's it - thanks. I just re-read it. Funny, it's very different from what I remember, and yet too similar to be something different. : ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snoopies622 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

author Jill Churchill

Can anyone find out from Jill Churchill's publisher (or other areas) what happened to her latest "Grace and Favor" book called "Smoke Gets in Your Eyes"? It was supposed to be published in 2011. I tried contacting a few places but never got a response. Thanks for your help. United States¿↑↔# — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:BD98:2F10:191A:73C5:6733:CEE3 (talk) 20:42, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did some web searching and found a site that showed a publication date in 2013 but no copies available. The Wikipedia page on Jill Churchill shows it as "not yet published". However, on that page you will find a link to the author's official site, which doesn't even mention that book. So it sounds as though it was canceled or has been delayed more than once. But on the author's site you will also find an email address. I have no idea whether that address still works, but it might be worthwhile sending a message there. --50.100.193.30 (talk) 04:27, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between "Irreligion" and "Atheist/Agnostic"?

Wikipedia is not a soapbox and neither is the reference desk. Ask a question you wish to find references for, and we will provide them. There's none of that going on here. --Jayron32 00:56, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I was just reading through the Wikipedia articles on Asian Americans, Hispanic and Latino Americans, African Americans, and White Americans, and apparently, White Americans and Hispanic Americans have the atheist/agnostic label, whereas Asian Americans have the irreligion label, and African Americans have no atheist, agnostic, or irreligious label. o_O Please explain how the "atheism/agnosticism" group differs from the "irreligion" group, and explain why the religions are attributed to race. 140.254.226.222 (talk) 21:20, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have to go to the original source. The African American page, for example, cites the Pew Forum, which notes a portion of African Americans who are religiously unaffiliated. Hence, Wikipedia is biased and inaccurate. 140.254.226.222 (talk) 21:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, a mixed-race marriage can produce offspring that looks half-Asian and half-White but are raised Jewish. 140.254.226.222 (talk) 21:30, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

What's the deal with asking yourself a question, and then immediately answering it yourself, with a dig at Wikipedia? Also, the conflation of race and religion here is misleading and unrelated to the header. AlexTiefling (talk) 21:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which god checks skin colour before revealing herself to someone? HiLo48 (talk) 21:52, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Most probably, most of them. How else could you explain that most cultures only ever depict their gods in their own likeness? --Stephan Schulz (talk) 22:05, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of imagination. Dbfirs 22:42, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT IF IT NEVER HAPPENED

Hi wikipedians i`m writing an alternate history novel in which the slave trade basically thrawted in it`s early years by africans who banded toghether and stopped the slave trade in it`s tracks. my basic question is what would be some of the sociological differences in american and world history if the slave trade basically never happened. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.52.23.137 (talk) 23:34, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No American civil war. (Or, if it did happen, a very different war.) HiLo48 (talk) 00:16, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unless New World natives were kept as slaves in large numbers instead. —Tamfang (talk) 00:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not possible. Of course, the European settlers would have rather had Native American slaves (cheaper than importing them). However, they all basically died because they lacked immunity to old-world diseases like small pox. The fact that the Native American slaves kept dying while the Africans (which had immunity to such diseases) didn't is what led to the Transatlantic Slave Trade in the first place. I believe (though I may be mistaken on the specific book) that this is covered in either 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus or 1493: Uncovering the New World Columbus Created or a similar book. --Jayron32 00:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tamfang -- In most cases, Indians were not found to be usable over the long-term as a labor force in centralized slave-worked plantations raising commercial crops such as sugar, indigo, cotton etc. Spanish attempts to use Indians in such roles was partly what led to the depopulation of a number of Caribbean islands in the 16th century (leading to the perceived necessity to import Africans as a substitute). AnonMoos (talk) 01:03, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The New World, particularly the Caribbean, would have fewer African-descended inhabitants. —Tamfang (talk) 00:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The USA these days would be much less obsessed with race. HiLo48 (talk) 00:39, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

...and the country would have to find another excuse for a holiday on the third Monday in January. HiLo48 (talk) 00:42, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The U.S. used to celebrate Lincoln's Birthday (a few weeks later) in its place. Lincoln's Birthday and Washington's Birthday got smashed together into Presidents' Day when Martin Luther King, Jr. Day became a holiday. They didn't give us one extra day, they just swapped out one that was previously celebrated. --Jayron32 03:59, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This being one of those rare blue moon events where HiLo and I agree... I thought I'd point that out. Excellent points. You're forgetting one small detail... large swaths of the British and Netherlands, and also the rest of Europe in general, would not have gotten rich despite banning it in their own countries. Shadowjams (talk) 03:50, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No Chuck Berry. No Michael Jackson. No Oprah. No Jimi Hendrix. No Billie Holiday. HiLo48 (talk) 00:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Musically speaking, no Buddy Holly, no Elvis, no Tom Petty either ... ---Sluzzelin talk 03:59, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Slavery was never as simple as from Africa to the Americas. Some 12 millions Africans were enslaved and sent to the Americas but 10 to 18 million were enslaved and sent to the Muslim world (as well as at least a million Europeans). (Arab slave trade) The American slave trade lasted some four hundred years while the Arab slave trade lasted over 1,000. Slavery in Africa between tribes was also common. Rmhermen (talk) 01:32, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There wouldn't have been an abolition movement to end slavery in Britain, France (by extension their colonies), or the US. So perhaps slavery would still be legal. That's a strange thought. OttawaAC (talk) 01:39, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't really a very ref-desk-friendly question. We can point you in the direction of outside sources, as some have astutely done above, but this sort of speculation is really outside the ref desk's purview. Evan ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:18, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Siberian and Central Asian slaves from Russia. Indian slaves from India. Muslim slaves from North Africa and the Ottoman Empire.
Sleigh (talk) 03:25, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese slaves from China.
Sleigh (talk) 03:30, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Our OP geolocates to New York. I suspect his "alternate history novel" will be based on the American slave trade having never happened. HiLo48 (talk) 03:32, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

People would probably still make zombie movies, but almost certainly nobody would call them that. ☯.Zen Swashbuckler.☠ 14:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This would have meant that the powers in Europe would have had competition from Africa. It would have been less likely that by the 19th century most of the World would have been under the control of the Western powers. With less contacts with the Asia the British Agricultural Revolution would not have happened when it did. This would have led to social unrest and civil wars in Europe. The Industrial revolution would have been hampered due to lack of capital from the colonies to finance it. It would also have had far less social benefits, the focus would have been a lot more on building weapons to fight the internal conflicts.

We would find ourselves today living in an 18th century like World. Progress toward a 20th century World would have been blocked by stalemate between the local powers in Europe and internal conflicts keeping them weak. Count Iblis (talk) 01:45, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]