Humanities desk
< September 26	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 28 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded 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 27

Rosetta Stone

What does it say? I am surprised that our article and google searches don't provide the actual test in English. I know what the text is about but not a direct translation. Please provide if possible. Thanks Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 09:41, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rosetta Stone decree. 41.165.67.114 (talk) 09:47, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Pal! Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 10:12, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Rosetta Stone article not only links to "Rosetta Stone decree" in its first sentence, but also has a hatnote above that, directing you to that article. At the risk of sounding sarcastic, I'm not sure how we can make that any more obvious. Alansplodge (talk) 17:17, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And, of course, what it actually says is unimportant, it's the fact that it says it in 3 languages that is so valuable for translators. It could just as well have been graffiti: "Akhenshemp eats dog poo !". SinisterLefty (talk) 17:32, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is interesting to note that many ancient texts we have are rather banal things, stuff like accounting ledgers and things like that. Much of what we know of extant cuneiform writing, for example, consists of things like "Gilgamesh purchased 27 sheep from Sinbad for the price of 35 bales of wheat" and things like that (see for example Ebla tablets#Content and significance. --Jayron 32 17:51, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

paid wages, complaints about quality of delivered stuff, order to dispatch workers, ...

BTW I just discovered Behistun Inscription, the "Rosetta Stone" for cuneiform. Gem fr (talk) 23:57, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seemingly mundane stuff, yet quite valuable in terms of understanding everyday life. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:33, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A bit more interesting but quite irrelevant fact is that Sir Henry Rawlinson, 1st Baronet who first deciphered cuneiform was father to Henry Rawlinson, 1st Baron Rawlinson the First World War general, and also to Sir Alfred Rawlinson, 3rd Baronet, a larger-than-life daredevil pilot and racing driver, who started the war in 1914 as an amateur chauffeur on the Western Front but by sheer bluster had by 1916 had been given command of the anti-aircraft defences of London. He finished the war as an intelligence officer and was incarcerated by the Turks until 1921. Alansplodge (talk) 09:37, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@81.131.40.58: Unfortunately, the translation given at Rosetta Stone decree is very hard to read, but clearer translations can be found here and here. A. Parrot (talk) 20:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

————————————————————————— ————————————————————————— Somehow my contributions to this section disappeared without explanation. I have to think a person with admin or similar powers did it. I am restoring a transcript of the latest version that I can find, although it it doesn’t contain all of my edits to this section, and may well not contain the later edits of other users. It does as far as I can see contain everything and more that appearars above the two lines I have typed in above....I don’t think it was right for my contributions to have been removed, particularly without any record of the removal and no consultation, explanation, or even notification to me. I do realize there reasonable or almost reasonable explanation for the mysterious disappearance of what I wrote. Please notify and explain to me if you erase any of this:

Rosetta Stone

What does it say? I am surprised that our article and google searches don't provide the actual test in English. I know what the text is about but not a direct translation. Please provide if possible. Thanks Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 09:41, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rosetta Stone decree. 41.165.67.114 (talk) 09:47, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Pal! Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 10:12, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Rosetta Stone article not only links to "Rosetta Stone decree" in its first sentence, but also has a hatnote above that, directing you to that article. At the risk of sounding sarcastic, I'm not sure how we can make that any more obvious. Alansplodge (talk) 17:17, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And, of course, what it actually says is unimportant, it's the fact that it says it in 3 languages that is so valuable for translators. It could just as well have been graffiti: "Akhenshemp eats dog poo !". SinisterLefty(talk) 17:32, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is interesting to note that many ancient texts we have are rather banal things, stuff like accounting ledgers and things like that. Much of what we know of extant cuneiform writing, for example, consists of things like "Gilgamesh purchased 27 sheep from Sinbad for the price of 35 bales of wheat" and things like that (see for example Ebla tablets#Content and significance. --Jayron 32 17:51, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

paid wages, complaints about quality of delivered stuff, order to dispatch workers, ...

BTW I just discovered Behistun Inscription, the "Rosetta Stone" for cuneiform. Gem fr (talk) 23:57, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seemingly mundane stuff, yet quite valuable in terms of understanding everyday life. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?}carrots→ 02:33, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A bit more interesting but quite irrelevant fact is that Sir Henry Rawlinson, 1st Baronet who first deciphered cuneiform was father to Henry Rawlinson, 1st Baron Rawlinson the First World War general, and also to Sir Alfred Rawlinson, 3rd Baronet, a larger-than-life daredevil pilot and racing driver, who started the war in 1914 as an amateur chauffeur on the Western Front but by sheer bluster had by 1916 had been given command of the anti-aircraft defences of London. He finished the war as an intelligence officer and was incarcerated by the Turks until 1921. Alansplodge (talk) 09:37, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@81.131.40.58: Unfortunately, the translation given at Rosetta Stone decree is very hard to read, but clearer translations can be found hereand here. A. Parrot (talk) 20:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rich (talk) 19:11, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

4th industrial revolution

I have been listening to numerous lectures recently which reference the 4th industrial revolution. I am surprised again that we don't have an article on this. I am looking for information on when this is said to have started and ended, unless it is still ongoing. I would also be curious to know when and what the second and third were. he first I assume to have been the Industrial Revolution which took place with the cotton mills in the UK in the 1700s. Any help please. Thanks Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 09:53, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is some content on this at Technological revolution, though not in identical language. The second industrial revolution was sparked by the mainstreaming of electrical power and other innovations; and the third by digital computers. Someguy1221 (talk) 10:12, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of those cases where each random individual historian probably uses their own terminology. Generally the term industrial revolution refers to the European and North American period in the late 18th and early 19th century. Once we start naming other periods as also industrial revolutions, some people start numbering them. This is not a universal practice, and this "numbering" the various "industrial revolutions" depends entirely on the proclivities of the individual person who has decided what the other revolutions are. The Second Industrial Revolution is usually meant to mean the coming online of steel and petroleum in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, so there's at least some agreement on that. After that, it becomes less clear whether or not the digital revolution represents a third "industrial" revolution, or is its own thing. By the time we get to a "fourth revolution" we're now getting into the realm of "just making it up" phase. Maybe such terminology will catch on. It doesn't appear to have yet. --Jayron 32 12:17, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) From the Technological revolution article: "The phrase Fourth Industrial Revolution was first introduced by Klaus Schwab, the executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, in a 2015 article in Foreign Affairs. I'm not certain that it's a universally accepted term however.

We do have an article called Second Industrial Revolution, which says it is "also known as the Technological Revolution, was a phase of rapid industrialization from the late 19th century into the early 20th century".

Alansplodge (talk) 12:24, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

we could use a redirect or a disambiguation page, though. If the concept is popular enough, even if not generally accepted. Not sure it is, so I refrain to do that Gem fr (talk) 12:57, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked, it seems the term appears in the ~80, but no sure it refers to the same concept https://www.google.fr/search?q=Fourth+Industrial+Revolution&client=opera&hs=HOY&tbm=bks&sxsrf=ACYBGNTYxJp9npjbqtrB58Is4JMZTSX07Q:1569589209584&source=lnt&tbs=cdr:1,cd_min:1900,cd_max:1999&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjZ_J66h_HkAhXkx4UKHe6LAhkQpwUIIQ&biw=1736&bih=919&dpr=1 Gem fr (talk) 13:08, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Woman on a male only stage?

The article of Ann Cargill say that she performed in Calcutta, but where in Calcutta? The Calcutta Theatre had only male actors. Was she made an temporary excpetion as a guest artist there?--92.35.237.251 (talk) 15:54, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The fact is sourced to two articles, this one from the 1885 Dictionary of National Biography only says she played in "India" and does not mention Calcutta one way or the other. This artcle is the other source, from the 2004 edition of the same work (the DNB), is behind a paywall so I can't read it. Perhaps someone with an Oxford subscription can provide you with the text of that article, or can at least help to see if it mentions more about her India trip. --Jayron 32 16:25, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Diva famous again in death - The last season of a British singing sensation in Calcutta says: "Calcutta was no stranger to theatre and opera... H E Busteed in his Echoes from Old Calcutta, had documented the performance of the whole of Handel’s Messiah, and Stendahl wrote about Rossini’s La Cenerentola being produced here in 1814. The theatre was the city’s craze, and Esther Leach, the Queen of the Indian stage, had died in a fire onstage on November 2, 1843".

La Cenerentola is the story of Cinderella which would require a female lead (or a very convincing boy treble in drag) and Messiah has arias for more than one female solo part. Alansplodge (talk) 17:09, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The OP seems to be asking which theater however. The Calcutta Theatre, as they note, seems to have, at the time, had a "male-only performer" policy. However, it is worth pointing out that a city the size of Calcutta (which would have been large, even then, perhaps half a million or so people) would have had dozens of theaters. The question "which theater or theaters did she perform in" is not an unreasonable one. --Jayron 32 17:29, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not so according to Esther Leach, "The Mrs. Siddons of Bengal", which in the preview notes that the British residents of Calcutta "never seemed to be able to get a theatre going". It goes on to say that wealthy Bengalis staged classical Sanskrit plays in their own houses, but these had little interest for the British, apart from a few enthusiastic Orientalists.

We have an article on the Chowringhee Theatre which opened in 1813 to fulfil that need, but "was destroyed by fire in May 1839 and replaced by the Sans Souci Theatre", the place where Miss Leach met her dreadful fate in November of the same year. Alansplodge (talk) 17:43, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting! Thanks for that. I stand corrected! So, there does seem to be some contradiction between a theater that did not allow females to perform with a female performing there. --Jayron 32 17:46, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One thing I will note is that the article does not say that they did not allow females to perform. It states only that the house company of actors that staged its plays consisted only of males. That doesn't mean they did not allow females. --Jayron 32 17:49, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

European females were in short supply in colonial India. The East India Company used to send out young women who were considered "on the shelf" out to India and pay their expenses for a year, so that they could marry some of their frustrated young employees. This enterprise was known as "the fishing fleet". [1] Alansplodge (talk) 07:31, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.Jayron32's link, from the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, only says: "Mrs Cargill's summer season in 1782 was in Liverpool, and she then set off for India to join her latest lover, although it was rumoured that she transferred her affections to Robert Haldane, the captain of her ship. In Calcutta she 'played all her applauded opera characters at immense prices' and her benefit yielded 'the astonishing sum of 12,000 rupees' (Morning Post, 9 March 1784). She left for home in December 1783 on the East India packet Nancy, captained by Haldane, but the ship was wrecked off the Isles of Scilly, probably on 4 March 1784. The press reported that her body was found naked with an infant clasped in her arms, later that the child was not her own, and then that her body was with the captain's in his cabin, but the enduring image of the unfortunate Mrs Cargill 'floating in her shift, and her infant in her arms' is found in the London Chronicle (9 March 1784). She was buried at St Mary's Church, Isles of Scilly." So another source will be required if it's wanted to specify which theatre in Calcutta. We might be able to find the newspaper articles cited by the DNB? 70.67.193.176 (talk) 14:23, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]