Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2010 September 16

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.

September 16

Julian dates v Gregorian dates

I'm planning to wear red on the date of the October Revolution in Russia (not so much as a political statement as a historical-knowledge statement). The date is often given as October 25, but this was under the old Julian Calendar. Under the modern calendar, it would be sometime in November, but most people know the date as October 25 and don't realise it is a different calendar, and so would'nt get it. Should I wear red on the traditional date (10/25) or the November date? Is there any precedent in other holidays? Thanks. 24.92.78.167 (talk) 01:23, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't know where those "most people" live who know the date of the October Revolution, but they're not anywhere near me in Maryland. Why not spread the word and wear red on both the Julian and Gregorian dates? One for the Old Bolsheviks, ones for the revisionists. --- OtherDave (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Even though the Commies always called it the "October Revolution", they actually very sensibly celebrated it on 7 November, because the anniversary falls on that day in the Gregorian Calendar, which they adopted a few months after the Revolution. To celebrate it on 25 October would be retrograde and kind of pointless. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 02:33, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, see also Thermidorian Reaction for another famous event which is known to us by a calendar no one uses anymore. --Jayron32 02:43, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

C. Iulius Caesar was murdered on the ides of March (15th) in the Julian calendar.
Sleigh (talk) 04:55, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

18 Brumaire. History repeats itself: first as tragedy, then as farce. WikiDao ☯ (talk) 05:30, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Big Julie's death is still remembered on 15 March, and rightly so. The Gregorian Calendar did not have retrospective effect prior to its introduction date of 15 October 1582 AD. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 06:24, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The Gregorian date of the Great October Socialist Revolution was the Seventh of November, 1917, and that's when old Leninists and Communists in the former constituent republics of the USSR (and beyond them) will celebrate (and have celebrated) it. My memory is confirmed by the articles on the Russian Revolution in Wikipedia and in Le Petit Larousse Illustré 2004, and by my little-read 3-volume Selected Works of Lenin (Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1967), volume 2, page 451, where the proclamation To the Citizens of Russia! from the Revolutionary Military Committee of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies† is dated 10 a.m., October 25, 1917, and whose source (the evening newspaper published by the Petrograd Soviet) is annotated by the editors as October 25 (November 7), 1917.

But I'm not sure if there's a good answer to your more general question. George Washington was born before the British Empire adopted the Gregorian Calendar, but Washington's Birthday used to mark the Gregorian date of his birth (February 22nd, 1732 New Style), not the different Julian date observed at the time he was born (February 11th, 1731, Old Style, when the New Year began on March 1st). On the other hand, Guy Fawkes Night, celebrating the thwarting of the Gunpowder Plot of 1605, falls on 5 November in modern (Gregorian) calendars, but November 5th (O.S.) was also the contemporary Julian date of the event, as shown by the contemporary letter from Sir Edward Hoby extracted at Gunpowder Plot#Flight. (A traditional rhyme begins, "Remember, remember, the Fifth of November, Gunpowder, Treason and Plot! ..." — although my father and brother remembered standing in line to watch the House of Commons with someone who remarked, "Guy Fawkes, now there's someone who went to Parliament with the right idea!").

† Whose rather clumsy translation begins: "The Provisional Government has been deposed. State power has passed into the hands of the organ of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies—the Revolutionary Military Committee, which heads the Petrograd proletariat and the garrison." ¶ By the way, I'm a non-Leninist democratic socialist/social democrat, so my sympathies are more with the Mensheviks than the Bolsheviks. In the year this collection was published, fifty years after the October Revolution, I heard none other than the Provisional Government's prime minister, Alexander Kerensky, then at Stanford's Hoover Institution, talk at Berkeley to mark, if not exactly celebrate, the anniversary. —— Shakescene (talk) 07:02, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I remember having a similar discussion about "Friday the 13th" a while back. I think what I ended up saying there was: no calendar system is "wrong," but all calendar systems are "arbitrary." I recommend celebrating the October Revolution on the same day that most Russians do, since it was a Russian event so they get to decide when to celebrate it. As to what to "call" that day, that's really entirely up to you (eg., this year I personally prefer to call it "Sweetmorn, The Aftermath 19, Year of Our Lady of Discord 3176"). WikiDao ☯ (talk) 14:15, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I was going to mention that, but I couldn't remember where we were discussing it. Adam Bishop (talk) 17:23, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Just a note about calendar systems. All are "arbitrary" in the sense that they are imposed by humans rather than nature, but if you have the right number of "days" in a solar year (or close to it), you get better results. If you set your "year" to be an arbitrary number of days, you end up with no consistency in the seasons and other effects that make having a calendar somewhat useless. So any calendar system is arbitrary, but if you don't set it up in a "science-based" way then you're celebrating Christmas in the winter one year, in the summer five years later, and so forth. That kind of thing matters if you're dependent on the calendar for things like planting and harvesting times. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:18, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes. As I said way-back-when:

..."What makes calendar systems arbitrarily "disagree," btw, is that they are trying to reconcile (at least) two different repeating cycles in time that do not perfectly correspond: in the case of "solar" calendars, for example, the period of Earth's rotation about the sun (a "year") is not, unfortunately, an integer multiple of the period of Earth's rotation about its axis (a "day"). There are various ways to deal with that problem; the Gregorian system is better at dealing with it than the Julian system, but both systems provide some scheme for naming all days in all years." ... etc.

A calendar system is just an arbitrary system for naming days. (Er, can a system be arbitrary?) I'm not sure any calendar is perfect though as far as getting a consistent reliable working definition of "day" right. WikiDao ☯ (talk) 20:57, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

• • Purely from an academic point of view; you should be able to calculate this if you study the Gregorian Calendar and the Julian Calendar, and the need to correct the Julian Calendar (i.e. the one day in four years) you should have no trouble calculating. I am not discussing your reasons for this. It has been calculated that the 12 July should be 8 July in the North of Ireland. (There were many other factors involved, as Julian added 22+23+22 days to one year to compensate for the Caesar years, when no corrections were made, see Julian Calendar, political reasons were also in play. The custom was to add days between February and March.). It does make sense to celebrate the event on the correct date, historically. {Hope this helps}. P.S.: The Ides of March may be already a recalculated date from ancient days, i.e. 14th day, or as a dictionary puts it: 15th of March, May, July, or October, or 13th of other months. MacOfJesus (talk) 14:00, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

• • See also: Roman Calendar, with the section: "Converting pre-Julian dates". Also the many article pages with "Ides..." - MacOfJesus (talk) 21:06, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

What do Los Angeles folk eat for breakfast?

Do they eat whole wheat bread? Kittybrewster ☎ 08:39, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Los Angeles is a multi-ethnic city. The "folk" do not share a common breakfast preference. Some will eat whole wheat bread. Others will not. -- kainaw™ 12:02, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Los Angeles is also huge. I'm sure you can find people there eating everything under the sun there. Whole wheat toast wouldn't be out of the question, though. --Mr.98 (talk) 15:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Valois in South America

por favor quisiera saber como llega "Valois" a suramerica, concretamente a Colombia, quienes llegan al nuevo continente utilizando este apellido, si la unica heredera de la DINASTIA VALOIS no tuvo descendientes? gracias! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.26.158.158 (talk) 06:47, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Below is the Google translation of the above question Rojomoke (talk) 07:37, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

please let me know as it comes "Valois" in South America, specifically Colombia, who come to the new continent using this name, if the only heir of the Valois dynasty had no descendants? thanks! -

Transferred from Science. Ariel. (talk) 10:17, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The human translation is "Please, I would like to know how the surname "Valois" arrives(ed) in South America, specifically Colombia, who reaches(ed) the continent using this surname if the only descendant of the VALOIS DYNASTY had no descendants? Thank you" Richard Avery (talk) 10:28, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The surname "Valois" is common in French Canada and bears no relationship with the former royal family. It is much rarer in France (this site says there only a little over 1500 persons with the name there). Various genealogy sites claim the name derives from the village of Valois, located north of Paris. It likely came to Colombia through an immigrant from France or French Canada with this name. --Xuxl (talk) 16:14, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Some points of clarification and ideas:

• The "house" name of European royalty is not equivalent to surname. Many European monarchs did not have a formal surname; such issues being important for the common people, not monarchs.
• Kings of the House of Valois, if they had surnames and had followed standard Western Europe surname practice, would have taken the surname Capet, being direct, male-line descendants of Hugh Capet, as were all French kings. This is evident as, King Louis XVI of France was refered to as "Citizen Louis Capet" when he was executed.
• Using the name Valois does not mean that the user is necessarily descended from the French royal line. There was a County of Valois, and others may use the name from there, or there could be other unrelated families who used the name.
• There were illegitimate descendants of the family who outlived the legitimate branches. See Jeanne of Valois-Saint-Rémy for one example.

Just some ideas. --71.200.75.37 (talk) 16:51, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps someone could translate the answers back for 190.26.158.158? Machine translation renders this. (Anyone who does a real human translation can delete this post of mine.) Best, WikiJedits (talk) 00:10, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

El " del apellido; Valois" es común en Canadá francés y no lleva ninguna relación con la familia real anterior. Es mucho más rara en Francia (este sitio dice allí solamente un poco sobre 1500 personas con el nombre allí). Los varios sitios de la genealogía demandan el nombre derivan de la aldea de Valois, norte localizado de París. Vino probablemente a Colombia a través de un inmigrante de Francia o de Canadá francés con este nombre. --Xuxl (charla) 16: 14,16 de septiembre de 2010 (UTC)

Algunos puntos de la clarificación y de las ideas: * El " house" el nombre de los derechos europeos no es equivalente al apellido. Muchos monarcas europeos no tenían un apellido formal; tales ediciones que son importantes para el pueblo, no monarcas. * Los reyes de la casa de Valois, si tuvieran apellidos y hubieran seguido práctica estándar del apellido de Europa occidental, habrían tomado el apellido Capet, siendo directos, varón-línea descendientes de Hugh Capet, al igual que todos los reyes franceses. Esto es evidente como, refirieron a rey Louis XVI de Francia como " Ciudadano Louis Capet" cuando lo ejecutaron. * Usando el Valois conocido no significa que descienden al usuario necesariamente de la línea real francesa. Había un condado de Valois, y otros pueden utilizar el nombre de allí, o podría haber otras familias sin relación que utilizaron el nombre. * Había descendientes ilegítimos de la familia que sobrevivió a las ramas legítimas. Vea Jeanne del Valois-Santo-Rémy para un ejemplo. Apenas algunas ideas. --16:51 de 71.200.75.37 (charla), 16 de septiembre de 2010 (UTC)

Dating in America

How do you approach a girl in America ? I mean what is the ideal way to ask a girl out in a respectable manner... Jon Ascton  (talk)

You can check telenovelas or soap operas, and find lots of sucessful ways to start a relation without actually asking for a date. Or perhaps not so sucessful, but that it will be fun and kept you busy, there's no doubt... MBelgrano (talk) 13:28, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

While I doubt there's any one answer that can be generalized as the "ideal" for all of the US, variations on "Would you like to <do something> with me?" is a perfectly acceptable way to ask a girl out in a respectable manner. Fun fact: the first such question I addressed to my wife was "Why don't you come watch Monday Night Football with us?" — Lomn 14:11, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I can see why you kept her. Googlemeister (talk) 14:13, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Jon, for you I would recommend starting with There's Something About Mary -- good luck! ;) WikiDao ☯ (talk) 14:29, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

First of all please be ready to seed her with her child if she would like one now. It is extremely rude to go on a date with a woman, and when she says "Jon, I would like you to seed me with child tonight", not to do so. Please be prepared to support the child with between one fifth and one third of your net pay. Do not date a woman if you are planning on being unemployed or without a source of income, this is extremely rude. Above all, take it easy, relax, be yourself, and have fun! 84.153.224.118 (talk) 15:13, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The first rule is to ignore advice random idiots people post on internet message boards, as chuckleheads will post stupid advice "for the lulz". (vide supra; also infra, if I'd hazard a guess.) Movies and television, especially Romcoms, are also renowned for presenting a horribly distorted and unachievable view of romance. Sorry I don't have any advice, but even if I did, I would probably urge you to ignore it as ignorant prattle. -- 174.21.233.249 (talk) 15:40, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I second your final sentiment: to your supra and infra, you should add intra. 84.153.224.118 (talk) 16:04, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

To find a date is the second step... You must have in mind a lady you care to court. A way to do this is go to a meeting/place that you find intriguing/exciting. For example, go to a local advocacy group of some sort (Habitat for Humanity, etc.) and get involved. This does demand de-isolation, a difficult detail to do, yes. It also, however, ensures a lasting cooperative relationship with one who has similar ideals. Church-groups meet regularly to discuss Bible-based topics, a place to meet a respectable woman. In contrast, you could always go for the Rule of Ugly-Early. schyler (talk) 17:07, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Habitat for Humanity is certainly a respectable place to meet a girl in the US, but I've met quite a few there who were serving an alternative sentence. Something to be wary of there, Jon. BTW, are you planning a visit to the US yourself sometime soon, or is your question more just theoretical? Have you looked at the Dating article? WikiDao ☯ (talk) 17:22, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

"Movies and television, especially Romcoms, are also renowned for presenting a horribly distorted and unachievable view of romance" Oh, no! Does that mean that opening her window and getting inside her house during the night to ask what does she feel for me, is not romantic? Well, that explains why did she call the police instead of kissing me, as in the telenovela. Well, what about kidnapping her before her wedding? Don't tell me that doesn't work, it's a classic! MBelgrano (talk) 18:34, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

It should also be noted that there are an increasing number of "Online dating services" for the explicit purpose of finding a date. This doesn't work so well if you have a specific girl in mind who you want to ask out, but if you're just looking for a girl it may be an option as a socially acceptable way to get into a romantic relationship. Depending on your age and interests, such services may be more or less popular among your demographic (the stereotype is that they're more popular with middle aged people). Here's a site that appears to try to collect and organize statistics about online dating (I don't vouch for its reliability, but it at least appears that they know what they're talking about). Buddy431 (talk) 19:06, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

There was a time when foreign students in the US would simply walk up to any American girl and ask "Do you have a boyfriend?" in the tone one might ask "Is this seat taken?" It was not always well received. Dating services were mentioned. There are more ways to meet someone than going to a bar and picking someone up, but that might be a quick way to get to coupling. The venue will sort the type of person, to some extent. A religious Jewish girl joined a Jewish traditional folk dance club at college, not because she had the faintest interest in the activity, but to meet a certain sort of man, and it worked out for her. If you go to church, you can meet girls. Sing in the choir? Join a religious study group? Rent a community garden plot and you will have lots of opportunities to talk to neighboring gardeners. Take an adult ed class in anything and there will be chances for discussion, or "study groups." Play a sport or join a health club. Have any friends? Let them fix you up with a date. Edison (talk) 20:02, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

How tall was Éamon de Valera?

Former Irish revolutionary and president Éamon de Valera's was famously called "The Long Fellow" because of his unusual tallness but I have never seen the height defined. The nickname "The Long Fellow" is still in common use; one of his biographies is even called The Long Fellow; so, how tall was he, and can you provide a trustworthy reference, preferably online? I've looked around with no success. --O'Dea (talk) 17:12, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

This Sunday Times article from 1962 gives his height as six foot three. Karenjc 18:11, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for finding that source, Karenjc. Your search was better than mine, and the Sunday Times sometimes gets its facts correct. The newspaper's phrase "six foot three" triggered a memory of a verse I learned when I was eight:

John Hickey

had a ten foot mickey

and he showed it to the lady next door.

She thought it was a snake

and she hit it with a rake

and now it's only two foot four.

There it is for posterity in Wikipedia. It's important to lower the tone a fraction when we're all so busy at serious Wikiwork.--O'Dea (talk) 21:11, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Which gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "The Long Fellow." Textorus (talk) 21:54, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Voting in Dáil Éireann - or not

The article on Recognition of same-sex unions in Ireland says, in the lead, that the Civil Partnership Act 2010 "was passed without a vote by the Dáil on 1 July 2010 and was passed by the Seanad on 8 July 2010 by a vote of 48-4." And this is confirmed by the cited sources. But neither the article nor the sources explain how you can pass a bill without a vote.

The article on the Dáil has a section on voting procedure, but that doesn't seem to address this particular circumstance. Can anyone enlighten me on this parliamentary point? Textorus (talk) 21:31, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

From some searching I managed to find [1] Nil Einne (talk) 22:11, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks for the link. Sort of like voting-by-abstention, sounds like. Never heard of that before, wonder if that is peculiar to the Irish Parliament. Textorus (talk) 23:02, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The Dáil largely adopts British Parliamentary procedure which means that when a question comes to be decided, the Speaker asks those in favour to shout 'Yes' (in Irish, "Tá"), and then asks those against to shout 'No' ("Nil"). If everyone shouted 'Yes' and no-one shouted 'No' then there's no need to go counting and the Speaker just declares the result. Other Parliaments on the British model do it that way too. Sam Blacketer (talk) 23:39, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Well yes, I understand what you're saying, Sam, but then that's a voice vote, no? (The same thing is sometimes done in the U.S. Congress, too.) Which doesn't seem to be what was described about the passage of this bill. Textorus (talk) 23:57, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Normal usage in the UK is to regard only divisions - where MPs walk through the lobby, get their names ticked off and are formally counted - as votes. I suspect Ireland is the same. The vast majority of questions which have to be decided are done just on "collecting the voices". Sam Blacketer (talk) 00:02, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

As it said at the link Nil posted, they only ask for votes against, and if nobody speaks, it passes. It's sort of like half a voice vote. The same thing is done in the Canadian Parliament on some procedural questions, but I don't think they do it for actual legislation. --Anonymous, 04:28 UTC, Setpember 19, 2010.

Thanks for confirming that. Do they then have a voice vote where they ask for ayes and nays (or whatever) if there are people against? Nil Einne (talk) 17:00, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah, now that I think of it, I'm only talking about procedural situations where unanimous consent is required. Consent is indicated by silence. So there is no need for a followup procedure if someone votes no. --Anonymous, 00:29 UTC, September 20/10.

In the US Congress, there are certain votes where the President of the particular House in question will call a vote, "All in favor say 'aye', all against, 'nay'", then they'll gavel and say, "the ayes have it", wihtout ever taking a vote nor even considering how many nays there might have been. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 06:12, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Correct, Everard, but that's still a voice vote, not "no vote," as the Irish press described the passage of the bill I mentioned above. Unless that's just the peculiar custom of the Irish media to report it that way if there's no actual division or electronic vote taken. Textorus (talk) 08:20, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Voting on the voices is pretty much the default way motions are passed or rejected in the Australian Parliament. There's only a division (ie. where the names of those voting for or against the motion are recorded) if a member or senator asks for one. That makes sense if the numbers are fairly even; more often, it's blindingly obvious that the vote has gone the way it's gone (because most motions are decided on party lines and those numbers are known exactly), but the losing side wants it to be recorded for posterity that they opposed it and wants all their individual names mentioned in the record of proceedings. Or, where a member wants to vote against their own party's position, they'll call for a division so that they can "cross the floor". -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 06:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Hannah Boone Pennington

Bold textI searched for Bucks County Pennsylvania and got to the page. But I dont see anything on the History part that Hannah Boone Pennington was born there. She is the brother to Daniel Boone. She was born in Bucks Co. PA. and buried at Old Mulkey Meeting House Church cemetary in Tompkinsville Ky. This is a fact! and I live here in Tompkinsville Ky. and seen her grave many many times. It reads on her gravestone Born in Bucks Co., Pa. If you need anymore information on this you can contact (contact info removed) She is the park manager. I think it should be mentioned on that page for Bucks County that Hannah Boone Pennington was born there.

Not sure what this is in reference to, but it's a bad idea post phone numbers here. I have removed the contact info you provided. WikiDao ☯ (talk) 22:24, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I have made this into a new section for you, as it is unrelated to the previous question. Also, all I can say is that if you feel that that person is notable enough to be mentioned on the page you refer to, then you should post your request on that page's Discussion page (see the tab on the top left of that page), and not here. This page is for general questions related to the Humanities, and not for requests for additions to articles. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:40, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Unknown play

During a conversation with my father about a production of Death of a Salesman that I'm going to see, he got off on a bit of a tangent about a play, later made into a movie, both called Marty. I think he's confused though. He says it was written by Chekov but I can't find anything by that name by Chekov or Miller. Anyone know what he might actually be thinking of? He mentioned the idea that, like DoaS, the characters are all living lies. Anyway, any ideas? Dismas|^(talk) 23:51, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Your dad meant to say Marty was written by Paddy Chayefsky. DoaS was by Arthur Miller. Both are great plays. Textorus (talk) 00:01, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I read that article but going by the plot here, I wasn't certain that is what he was referring to. I know DoaS was by Miller and is great. I saw it once in high school and saw the film with Dustin Hoffman. Now I get to see it with Christopher Lloyd playing Willy Loman. Thanks again, Dismas|^(talk) 00:14, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good, enjoy. Textorus (talk) 01:06, 17 September 2010 (UTC)