Humanities desk
< March 7	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 9 >

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.

March 8[edit]

Livonian fashion[edit]

Our article on Livonia includes this rather splendid picture by Dürer. Is the burqa/birthday cake type affair in the middle accurate, or could it be Dürer's fantasy? If real, were such things common in medieval Europe, or was this a particularly Livonian taste? Henry ^Flower 04:52, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not common in medieval Europe. StuRat (talk) 04:55, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to this page, from the Finnish National Board of Antiquities, as late as the 18th Century Livonian women were wearing a garment with prehistoric roots in the Baltics and Finland, a large shawl fastened at the front with a silver clasp and covering the head and shoulders. There is unfortunately no illustration, but my guess is this would be the "burqa" in Dürer’s drawing, although Dürer is no doubt embellishing a bit.--Rallette (talk) 07:14, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These costumes show a slight Byzantine influence.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which Are The 4 Publicly Funded Art Universities?[edit]

Here claims that it is one of 4 publicly funded art universities in Canada (paraphrased). Which are the other 3?Curb Chain (talk) 10:01, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you had looked further into that Web site, you would have found the first sentence here. Deor (talk) 11:13, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hound names[edit]

Quote from "Looking back" by EM Creighton: "Beagles are not given 'doggy' names, they have what is known as hound names.". What does this mean? Kittybrewster ☎ 10:07, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of digging found this book about hunting with dogs, which discusses the naming of beagles and other hounds. Even in 1903, the names are described as "old fashioned" but still "preferable". "How infinitely to be preferred, for example, are such names as Bravery, Champion, Stormer, and Statesman, to Squeaker, Sally, Thwacker, and Gaslight, all of which I have encountered". Hound names seem to be more solid, masculine names, as opposed to the slightly more light-hearted names you'd give a pet dog. Smurrayinchester 12:15, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Wolves and hounds were especially meaningful to the Celts. The implied meaning of many wolf and hound names is that of a warrior."[1] Bus stop (talk) 13:07, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The naming of hounds is important because a Foxhound is an animal of enormous dignity and is far and away better bred than most of the humans who are likely to come in contact with it. It deserves a name in keeping with its station."[2] Bus stop (talk) 13:13, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would think the point was to name an animal in some connection to its function, i.e. "workers" vs. "pets". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:42, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mayan Calendar, Leap Days & The Winter Solstice[edit]

Main Question: Is it just a coincidence that the Mayan calendar rolls over to the next long count on the winter solstice?

It's my understanding that the Mayan long count calendar is not designed to track the seasons (as the Gregorian calendar does) but rather just to count the number of days since their creation, which is why it does not have any leap days. Is this correct?. If it is, then is it just a coincidence that the next rollover on 13.0.0.0.0 happens to fall on the winter solstice? Thanks in advance for any help. --CGPGrey (talk) 11:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, according to Mesoamerican Long Count calendar the previous rollover, 12.0.0.0.0 happened on September 18, 1618, and the one after, 14.0.0.0.0 will happen on March 26, 2407. The Mayan calendar wasn't year based but day based, so there's no reason it should follow solstices. Indeed, the Mayans, being tropical, wouldn't have cared about the solstices much at all since in the tropics, the sun doesn't reach its highest/lowest point on the solstices and without accurate clocks there's no other way to tell what day the solstice is. Instead according to an (uncited) claim in our article on Maya civilization they cared about zenial passages, when the sun is directly overhead - much easier to measure. Smurrayinchester 12:26, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Will EU be like SO?[edit]

Given the current economic problems in Europe (Greece, Portugal, Spain, etc.) and the European Union being in disarray, do you think it will cease to exist in the way the Soviet Union ceased to exist? B-Machine (talk) 17:26, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The reference desk does not answer requests for opinions or predictions about future events. " RudolfRed (talk) 19:30, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It can't cease to exist in the way that the Soviet Union ceased to exist, because it does not exist in the way that the Soviet Union existed. The members of the EU have much more sovereignty than Soviet republics had. Looie496 (talk) 19:35, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, EU does not have centrally planned economy. --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 23:39, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

However, if the EU goes out of business, it will indeed be like the USSR, in the sense that it will be non-existent. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:40, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another difference is that the EU isn't held together by the KGB and the tanks of the Red Army. Alansplodge (talk) 17:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It would only cease to exist if all the member governments wanted to withdraw - and that seems extremely unlikely in the foreseeable future (are there even any major political parties that support withdrawal?). 130.88.99.218 (talk) 18:01, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you have to keep in mind that not all countries would withdraw at the same time (which would be unlikely) should a withdrawal occur. If one of the "power nations" such as France or Germany should withdraw (and indeed there are significant factions in both that support withdrawal from the EU) then the smaller nations would not see any point in staying in. It's a domino effect. 24.92.85.35 (talk) 17:14, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give a reference for "there are significant factions in both that support withdrawal"? I cannot think of *any* faction of German society, even less a significant one, that supports EU withdrawal. This sounds like some wet dream of the British tabloids. 86.130.188.210 (talk) 01:05, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When does crown copyright expire in Australia?[edit]

So I checked the section about Australian crown copyright, but there is no mention of how long it lasts, unlike the other sections. However, in the article about Cyclone Tracy, there is a mention of a "30-year rule". Does that mean that crown copyright in Australia lasts for 30 years? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 22:32, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The thirty-year rule generally refers to a system by which confidential official documents are made public after thirty years - nothing to do with copyright, but simply that they're now available to researchers through public archives, etc. Some particularly sensitive material used to run on a hundred-year rule, which was the same thing only stricter. (These strict rules are now a bit vaguer in some places because of freedom of information legislation, which usually doesn't set a fixed time but mandates that material can be released when asked for, if not otherwise protected. So some material that would normally have been closed after thirty years is now released much sooner; other material remains closed, if not applied for, until it's released under the normal run of things.)

Crown copyright in Australia currently lasts for 50 years (in most cases) - see Copyright law of Australia#Government-owned copyright. Shimgray | talk | 23:13, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Black Duke's Hand[edit]

I've been (hopefully) improving the Black Brunswickers article, which has a "Wikipedia:Good articles/History" rating, despite (until very recently) containing some machine-translated gibberish from the German article. Anyway, this site, describing the demise of the "Black Duke" at the Battle of Quatre Bras says; " It was a fatal wound, the musketball smashed through the Duke's one hand, his abdomen and his liver." Our article Frederick William, Duke of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel doesn't even mention that he only had one hand. So what happened to the other one? Google has failed me for once. Alansplodge (talk) 23:18, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds more like an awkward way of saying it smashed through "one of the Duke's hands", i.e. the other one was perfectly fine. But then, "one of his hands" is also a bit awkward because it sounds like he has a bunch of hands, while "one of his two hands" is redundant because obviously he only has two. Strangely enough "through the Duke's hand" sounds fine to me. I suppose the best solution would be to find out which hand and specify it. Or maybe he did have just one hand! (Or maybe you are being sarcastic and I just can't tell?) Adam Bishop (talk) 00:20, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No sarcasm intended. Alansplodge (talk) 01:11, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the Black Brunswickers article says "the Duke's only hand", but could this be, as you say, a poor machine translation? Adam Bishop (talk) 11:56, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Probably an error. According to this 1837 source, he was on horseback and the bullet went through his left hand. Iblardi (talk) 12:32, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that I added "the Duke's only hand" in a fit of over enthusiasm. I'll take it out again. I believe that the original language of the website I quoted above isn't English, so you're probably right - it's a translation error. Thanks for the reference Iblardi; my German is really poor, but isn't that gothic typeface difficult to read? The statue of the Duke shown on our WP page has him holding a sabre in his right hand, so I think we can conclude that he did have two hands. Thank you both. Alansplodge (talk) 15:35, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't think of doing a Google Image search. Here's the Duke's statue from a better angle, showing both hands. This portrait makes him look as mad as a box of frogs! Alansplodge (talk) 15:41, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved