Humanities desk
< August 4	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 6 >

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.

August 5

Hindu texts in Bengali

Is there a website that shows all of the Hindu texts and scriptures in Bengali language with Bengali translation? Please and thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donmust90 (talk • contribs) 01:48, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu literature is vast, and there is no definitive list of "all" the texts and scriptures. If you Google "hindu library" you will find numerous resources.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 06:22, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dedication protocols

I am quite curious about the niceties or courtesies surrounding the dedication of musical, literary or artistic works to people other than the creators' patrons.

It seems to be a given that a dedication requires either prior permission, or subsequent acceptance, by the dedicatee. For example, Elgar's Symphony No. 2 is "Dedicated to the memory of His late Majesty King Edward VII. This symphony, designed early in 1910 to be a loyal tribute, bears its present dedication with the gracious approval of His Majesty the King".

And Vaughan Williams' Symphony No. 5 is "Dedicated without permission to Jean Sibelius". Although permission was not sought in that case, the wording acknowledges that the opposite is usually the case.

Here are some examples of dedications that were spurned, rejected or declined by the dedicatees: [1], [2], [3]

And here is an example of a dedication being rejected by an entity other than the dedicatee.

Where are these rules codified? Or is this one of those things that people are just expected to know without ever having been told?

What's to prevent a writer from dedicating a book to someone without seeking their permission? And if the someone refused the dedication, what's to stop the writer from saying "I dedicated it you, and that's that. The dedication stays". It's not like a physical gift that can be returned to the donor. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:08, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are no rules or protocols. People aren't expected to know of rules that don't exist. Elgar's Symphony No. 2 dedication and Queen Victoria's rejection of a dedication are poor examples. Dedicating a work to a royal is tantamount to claiming royal warrant or royal patronage without permission.

Some authors write dedications in their books as a surprise to their recipients.

Cf. unauthorised biographies and when the subject rejects the biography (I can't find an article for Unauthorised biography or Unauthorized biography).
Sleigh (talk) 12:51, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How would Elgar have gotten permission from a deceased king? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:25, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I spot a misreading. Edward VII died while he was writing it, and being a royalist who'd accepted various honours, Elgar decided to dedicate it the memory of the late king. But that still required, protocol-wise, approval from the new king, George V.

Maybe when royalty is involved it's mandatory to obtain prior approval for dedications, to avoid perceptions of a claim of royal patronage when none may exist. But in other cases, what's to stop me from publishing my much-delayed and eagerly-awaited magnum opus with a dedication to whomsoever I damn well please, without seeking prior approval? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:14, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only the publisher would stop you.
Sleigh (talk) 04:25, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unless it's self-published. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:36, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Official Apology for slavery of the Black and for deporting the Natives

France has officially acknowledged and apologized for helping Nazis kill Jews. Australia has officially acknowledged and apologized for deporting Aboriginal people. These kind of (very late) official apologies, suggests that such move is designed for the Humiliated to be able to move on and quit living in perpetual hatred and resentment, to the benefit of general peace and productivity of the entire country. While searching Wikipedia for answers to my question, I found that even the USA has officially acknowledged and apologized to the Natives of Hawai (Apology Resolution). My question is, has the USA officially acknowledged and apologized for the Slavery of its Black minority, and by the way, is there also such an official acknowledgement and apology for the Deporting of the Native minority too? Thanks. Akseli9 (talk) 09:47, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See H.Res. 194 (110th): Apologizing for the enslavement and racial segregation of African-Americans. The text of the bill below is as of Jul 29, 2008 (Passed the House (Engrossed)), which has a brief mention in Slavery#Apologies. Alansplodge (talk) 09:51, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This also is relevant to the second part of your question. --Jayron 32 11:10, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Australia never deported Aboriginies. Australia removed aboriginal children from their parents who were all wards of the state (non-citizens until 1967). Australia apologised for the Stolen Generations.
Sleigh (talk) 13:14, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And if they had tried, where would they have been deported to? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:23, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at South Sea Islanders.

In the latter half of the 19th Century, people - mostly from Melanesia but also other parts of the Pacific - were kidnapped and taken to the colony of Queensland and the north of the colony of New South Wales to work in plantations and cane fields as slaves. Oh, sorry, I forgot we don't use that word: I mean "indentured labourers". And the beginning of the next century in the newly federated nation, a law was passed to "deport" people whose families and homes were now in Australia...

And as per WP:DONTGETMESTARTED, and the social media comments policy for public servants we recently had to sign, I'd better stop right here.

Pete in, erm, some place where the seasons are the wrong way around aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:00, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on this is Blackbirding. Its "see also" section shows how widespread various forms of kidnapped labour were. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 10:50, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We also have an article on Indian indenture system which describes the system of forced labour used in the British Empire and has been mentioned above (Indians were the main, but not the only, victims of it). At least in theory, it differed from slavery in that the labourers had to sign up voluntarily and they were paid a subsistence wage. It was based on the legal rules governing indentured servants and apprentices in English law; however, the practical application of these rules was often honoured more in the breach than the observance. Alansplodge (talk) 10:49, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1000 Bombings a year?

During a recent interview on NPR's Fresh Air, author Jeffrey Toobin, who wrote a book about Patricia Hearst, said: "During the early and mid ’70s, there were 1,000 — 1,000!— bombings a year in the United States … [due to] a violent political culture.” I don't have the book, and the claim wasn't discussed any further on the radio. I'm sceptical. I've googled around a little bit, and find some random speculation, but nothing that could meaningful confirm or refute that claim. Could anyone point to a credible reference that would help prove/disprove this quote? I'm less interested in opinions about 'pipe bombs', and entirely interested in references like FBI statistics or an academic research - or if anyone has the book to hand, does Toobin provide a reference? Thanks if anyone can provide a useful concrete reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.210.155.173 (talk) 13:08, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This does not appear comprehensive, but does have some information. This also has some information. This only goes back to the 1990s, but shows numbers two orders of magnitude less than the claim you note; two orders of magnitude drop in any crime statistic would HARDLY go without notice in the literature, the absence of discussion ANYWHERE of ANY such drop is conspicuous if it were true. --Jayron 32 13:19, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That would be about 3 bombings per day. If that were so, the papers would have covered it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:21, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a slight understatement. Official FBI statistics show 1,900 to 2,000 bombing attacks a year in the early 70s, although the number involving explosives (rather than firebombs) only once reached 1,000. However, if you look in the table on the right, you can see that these statistics include attacks on mailboxes which (in the year they were collated at least) made up the largest part of bombings. In other words, you only reach these numbers if you include every bomb used criminally in the United States, right down to cherry bomb pranks, rather than just political bombings. Incidentally, it looks like the 70s weren't a peak - the recorded rate in the mid-90s was far higher (although they changed the way that they recorded bombing statistics in 1990, you can see the trend beginning in the late 80s). 14:20, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

(A bit more digging shows that the FBI has only collected statistics on terrorism specifically since 1975, but in the late 70s, the rate varied from 111 in 1976 to 52 in 1980. Not all of these will have been bombings, but they set an upper limit on how many bomb attacks could have been due to "a violent political culture"). Smurrayinchester 14:32, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's playing HIGHLY fast-and-loose with the language. Kids playing with firecrackers is not a "bombing" under ANY definition of the word "bombing". I'd easily believe in any given year there are over 1000 reported crimes involving explosive devices. But that's not what the OP stated; they were looking for bombings. That's like counting emergency room visits where someone cuts themselves with a knife and counting those stats as "stabbings". --Jayron 32 16:46, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all. I'm the OP ... 1) interesting, I wouldn't have thought it; 2) this is how wikipedia should work. Today I learned something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.210.155.173 (talk) 15:53, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There were also organizations like The Weather Underground (not the weather site on the web for some reason named after them) which did bombings but tried to avoid harming people. So, you can't really compare that with terrorists who try to maximize carnage. StuRat (talk) 02:28, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This source, a book called Political Violence and Terrorism in Modern America: A Chronology, documents over 3,100 significant terrorist incidents in the United States between 1954 and 2005, many of which were bombings. There were over 30 significant revolutionary leftist bombings listed in the last ten weeks of 1970. This 1970 report, Radicalism and security, reports that in the year before, there were 32 bombings in Seattle, 100 successful and unsuccessful bombings in San Francisco, and 24 bombings in Detroit. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, most of the bombings were by anti-war activists and usually targeted unoccupied government offices in the middle of the night, but there were significant fatalities and injuries, StuRat. The 1970 Sterling Hall bombing killed one person and injured three. The 1970 Greenwich Village townhouse explosion killed three Weatherman bomb makers and injured two. The 1970 San Francisco Police Department Park Station bombing killed one officer, and injured nine others. List of Weatherman actions documents the many bombings carried out by that group over the years, and a successor group, the May 19th Communist Organization, carried out seven bombings in the early 1980s. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:56, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Of course them setting off bombs was a dangerous and irresponsible thing to do, but still nowhere near as dangerous as bombers who try to maximize fatalities, and kill dozens or hundreds at a time. StuRat (talk) 13:42, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That is true, but they were most certainly bombings intended to damage and disrupt government facilities and there were large numbers of such bombings in the late 60s and early 70s. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:24, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but there still weren't 1000 per year as the OP asked. 3100 in 50 years averages out to 62 per year. That's about 1 per week, but WELL short of the 1000 per year (or 3 per day!) the OP asked about. --Jayron 32 20:23, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

C'mon, Jayron32. The first source does not purport to document every single bombing over the 50 year period but rather the more serious ones. And if you think that the rate of bombings was more or less level annually over than those 50 years, then I am certain that you are wrong. For example, there were very few left wing bombings in the 1950s and early 1960s, but they became very common in the 1969 to 1972 time period, but declined dramatically after the Vietnam War wound down. That peak period is exactly the period that Toobin mentioned. KKK and white supremacist bombings in the 1950s and early 1960s were more lethal but much smaller in numbers. Another source I brought forward describes over 150 bombings and attempted bombings in just three cities at that 1969-1970 time frame. That is entirely consistent with the thousand per year mentioned by Toobin. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:46, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Working languages of the Courland empire

The Duchy of Courland, in present-day Latvia, had several small colonies in the Caribbean and West Africa. Just wondering what the working languages of those places would have been, and if Latvian itself was used much. I understand the nobility were descended from Teutonic Knights and would be more likely to speak German and write in Latin, but would ordinary Latvians have gone over as settlers? 129.67.116.239 (talk) 14:55, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Couronian colonization of the Americas doesn't say anything about language, but eight years ago Joostik left a comment on the talk page saying it was Lower German. Rojomoke (talk) 15:45, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia article at Duchy of Courland and Semigallia makes it clear that the language of Government would have been German, as the ruling class, the Kettler family, were ethnically German. I suspect there were many Baltic Germans there as well. Couronian colonization makes implications that Ethnic Germans were the colonizing force, by the connections drawn to the colonization efforts of Brandenburg. Also, at Couronian colonization of the Americas, the names of the settlements are German (Jacobsstadt, Neu-Mitau) and not, notably Latvian, Polish, Swedish, or any of the other languages which would have been spoken in the Duchy at the time. Whether individual colonists spoke German or another as a first language or in the home, it seems likely that German was the language of government and business and would have (as probably was true for the Duchy as a whole) been the lingua franca of the colony. --Jayron 32 16:41, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Latvian wasn't an administrative language anywhere at the time, so they used either High German (the main literary language) or Lower German (the original language of the majority of the German settlers). Settlers seem to have been (if I remember correctly) for a large part of Couronian descent so they probably spoke Couronian rather than Latvian (modern Latvian is mostly derived from Central Latvia, while the settlers IIRC came mostly from the western coastal region). Joostik (talk) 13:54, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Olympic events before the opening ceremony

Why it was decided to start some Olympic events before the opening ceremony, like in the current Olympics? I thought all events begin after the opening ceremony. Thnx. --93.174.25.12 (talk) 19:32, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just asked basically the same question on the Entertainment Desk yesterday. You might be interested in those replies. †Dismas†|^(talk) 19:56, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese states during Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn period

Are there any good maps of the feudal states of China during the waning years of the Western Zhou dynasty and the early part of the Spring and Autumn period when there were hundreds of states? Most maps I can find only depict the later part of the period when Jin started forming. Also is there any known number or estimate of how many feudal states existed when the country was most divided during this period?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 22:40, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]