Humanities desk
< May 21	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 23 >

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.

May 22

Dardanelles during Byzantine Empire

Did cities along the Dardanelles compete with Constantinople during the Byzantine Empire, both during the time the empire controlled the region and also during the latter years when it was not a part of the empire and conquered by the Ottomans and others. KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:55, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Çanakkale was built in 1462 by the Turks, nine years after the Fall of Constantinople in 1453. Gelibolu was captured by Venice in 1204 and was squabbled over by various powers until captured by the Ottomans in 1354. Lâpseki is an ancient settlement which was captured by the Venetians in 1359, [1] but I can't find a date when it fell to the Ottomans. Alansplodge (talk) 10:26, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At its peak, Constantinople was one of the largest cities in the world; during the early middle ages and high middle ages it was, undoubtedly, the largest city in the European world, nothing really compared. The population was over 500,000 people through most of the height of the Byzantine period; whatever settlements were on the Dardanelles you note maxed out at maybe a few tens of thousands. The population collapsed during the late middle ages to 1/10th of the peak, but such a collapse was not limited to Constantinople, it was across Europe; population numbers, and especially in urban areas, where city populations in all urban centers fell off a cliff. The Ottomans turned the city around by the early modern period (17th century) where the population rebounded to peak Byzantine numbers. Even today, at 15 million people, Istanbul is bigger than any other city in Europe, and at least 3x bigger than any other city in Turkey. --Jayron 32 12:49, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Margaret Mead “earliest sign of civilization” anecdote?

So I’ve been seeing this anecdote floating around the web the last few days and I’m trying to find its origin and whether it’s real. Basically, Margaret Mead was supposedly asked what the first sign of human civilization was, and responded that it was a healed femur, because it required the development of compassion. I did some rudimentary searching and couldn’t find an authoritative source. A few feelgood articles by people that aren’t anthropologists or biographers of Mead, and a bunch of religious websites. I did find a couple commencement addresses where someone related it in a speech, one in 1996 and one in 2000, but that’s as close as I could get. Snopes doesn’t have an article, though I’d expect as much traction as the story is now getting one should be forthcoming. Anyone able to verify or disprove this? 199.66.69.67 (talk) 16:38, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Was the 1996 address by an Angie DeWeese? fiveby(zero) 17:05, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, the 1996 account came from a commencement address at Purdue University. 199.66.69.67 (talk) 17:13, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You saw Paul Brand Fearfully and wonderfully made, and [2]? fiveby(zero) 17:40, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I recall reading somewhere of an archaeological/palaeontological case of advanced Hypervitaminosis A being interpreted as early evidence of compassion - the subject having apparently been fed liver for a protracted period when unable to fend for themself. Perhaps in one of Jared Diamond's books, something like that. DuncanHill (talk) 18:55, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Felony murder charge after someone intentionally kills themselves?

Is anyone aware of any specific cases in any US jurisdiction where someone was charged with felony murder resulting from a co-felon intentionally killing themselves? The obvious example would be people who assisted a suicide bomber who whether by intent or good fortune only kills themselves but cases like that are rare enough that I don't think it's ever happened in the US. (To be clear, I'm excluding cases where someone accidental kills themselves e.g. a bomb maker screws up and blows themselves up.) But you could get other examples e.g. as part of an insurance fraud scheme or the person doesn't want to go to prison or realises they hurt the child of someone who will seek violent retribution.

What about cases where a victim intentionally killed themselves? I'm excluding cases where someone wanting to kill themselves is a major part of the case e.g. someone terminally ill or someone depressed taking their own life. Instead I'm thinking of cases where it mostly or only arose after the felony such as where someone held captive or a rape victim kills themselves, and the person or people involved in holding them captive or the rape are the ones charged.

Nil Einne (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For clarity, I'm aware an accidental death e.g. by heart attack can result in a felony murder charge in some jurisdictions [3] (heart attack is probably not the best example as some would argue it's a predictable outcome but my understanding is even a fairly unpredictable accidental death can result in a felony murder charge), as can a co-felon being killed by the police [4] [5] as can providing the drugs resulting in an accidental drug overdose [6] [7]. And some jurisdictions e.g. Florida have a law which says "When a human being is killed during the perpetration of, or during the attempt to perpetrate"[8].

All this leads me to believe at least the victim, and maybe the co-felon example, must have arisen before at least as a case which was rejected by the courts. But I couldn't find anything except [9] [10],[11] I'm restriction it to the US mostly because they still have felony murder, some parts seem to apply it expansively, yet they also doesn't generally criminalise suicide anymore and are mostly common law jurisdictions with somewhat respected legal system.

Nil Einne (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be thinking of the death of Conrad Roy. Blythwood (talk) 18:41, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, the Felony murder rule is entirely distinct from murder itself being a felony. Under the felony murder rule, if two people are commiting a felony, and one causes a death, then the other one can be charged with murder even if he did not intend the death himself. In the US (perhaps elsewhere?) this is sometimes taken to the extreme that if two people are comitting a felony, and if in the course of their response the police kill one of them, the other can be charged for the murder of his accomplice. What Nil Einne is asking for is if there has ever been such a case but where one of the perpatrators commited suicide (perhaps in response to being surrounded by the police) and his accomplice was charged under this rule. -- ToE 21:34, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding that highly specific fact pattern, I believe State ex rel. Painter v. Zakaib, 411 S.E.2d 25 (W. Va. 1991), is relevant. In it, a botched burglary/kidnapping attempt led to one of the three juveniles being captured by the victim, with the other two attempting to rescue the third. The burglary/kidnapping would undoubtedly be a violent felony eligible for the felony murder rule under typical circumstances, and the rescue would probably be as well. When that rescue attempt failed, the two found themselves pursued by police. When the police pulled them over, one of the two committed suicide. The person who had initially been captured was charged with the murder of the person who committed suicide under the felony murder rule. The court held that in this case, the charge couldn't stand. I don't know, but would be interested to find out, what became of the other accomplice (the one that was in the car). The 7th Circuit cited this case obliquely when discussing felony murder in the context of an accidental accomplice death. United States v. Martinez, 16 F.3d 202 (7th Cir. 1994). I believe the broader question is answered more in the details of how felony murder statutes are written and function in specific jurisdictions, such as whether there is a causal linkage requirement (most jurisdictions seem to have this). See Guyora Binder, "Making The Best Of Felony Murder," 91 Boston U.L. Rev. 403, 482–95 (2011). 199.66.69.67 (talk) 02:45, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find anything other that Norval Morris source from UPenn Law, which is a pity, because this is a really interesting idea. I have to wonder how often a completely unrelated suicide occurs during the commission of a felony, though. It seems to me that that's the type of case you'd want to look at. If the suicide was a sudden reaction (e.g., bank robbery goes awry and one of the conspirators says, "Screw it, I'm not going to prison", and shoots himself), then you would have a good argument that the death was a proximate cause of the felony, and the rule would be more or less working as intended. (I'm assuming you're searching for an unique case where the rule appears to be applied in a weird/unintended way). Kalethan (talk) 22:19, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all. For clarity, I appreciate my original comment probably conveyed my feeling of the way the felony murder rule seems to be applied in sometimes in parts of the US but I don't actually care whether it can be argued to be fair that the felony murder rule applied to the suicide. I'm interested in all cases where the death was a suicide. My only exception is excluding those where the suicide is a key part of the case.

(This is somewhat difficult to define, and I acknowledge someone who takes their own live after committing a felony or whatever, may have a mental illness or other problems. But I wanted to exclude those cases where the main intent is to prosecute someone who it's felt assisted or pushed a suicide like the Conrad Roy example (even if felony murder wasn't used there). As to my mind, these are a special class, as evidenced for example by the discussion in some of the refs I provided. The suicide could still be related like where a co-felon kills themself rather than going to prison or someone kills themself as part of insurance fraud or a captive kills themselves rather than stay in captivity etc. But someone being prosecuted for felony murder for a completely unrelated suicide is also of interest although these would seem to be so unlikely they're probably not worth looking for.)

The reason this thought exercise arose is because of a talk page argument in relation to that controversial shooting in Georgia. Someone argued that the lead wasn't clear enough since the way it was worded at the time, the death could have been a suicide. Someone else countered that the mention of people being charged with felony murders was enough to establish that the death was a homicide (which is what the autopsy results concluded) and not a suicide. Since I like to nitpick, my first thought on this is it's wrong because you could have a case where there there's a dispute over whether someone killed themselves or it was staged to look like that. And although you would probably have problems sustaining such a case if every autopsy said suicide, you probably could do try with an inconclusive autopsy. (Okay yes, the article shouldn't be called "shooting of" in a case like that and there were probably other stuff which made it clear this wasn't the case, but that's a more sophisticated argument.)

But when I thought about it more, I realised that actually given how felony murder rule is applied, I suspected people could be charged with felony murder even over something no one disputes was suicide. My first thought example was a case where the suicide was a somewhat predictable outcome to those charged i.e. where the person had told their co-felons they'd kill themselves rather than get caught. But then reading more on the felony murder rule, I realised you probably didn't need that, even if the co-felons couldn't have really anticipated the suicide, they could probably still be charged in some cases.

Nil Einne (talk) 12:56, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]