Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 January 29

< Wikipedia:Reference desk | Archives | Humanities
Humanities desk
< January 28 << Dec | January | Feb >> January 30 >
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.


January 29

edit

Regulation of the high seas

edit

In areas of the ocean outside the Exclusive Economic Zone of any country (which I believe would be the case for any waters more than 200 miles from land), what regulatory body controls fishing and other economic activity such as deep-sea mining? Vultur (talk) 00:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ships in international waters are bound by the laws of whatever country's flag they fly. Most countries are signatory to various maritime treaties, including the UN treaties which recently established the International Seabed Authority to regulate deep-sea mining. FiggyBee (talk) 01:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. If a ship in international waters flew no flag (a pirate or other illegal group) and committed piracy only in international waters, who would have authority to try them? The UN? The first country they made port at? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vultur (talk • contribs) 03:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, found the answer at the international waters article - apparently any country can. Vultur (talk) 03:37, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Piracy is the oldest example of universal jurisdiction - and some would say, the only one. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Edwards' Delegates

edit

Assuming John Edwards drops out of the democratic primaries can he direct his delegates who to vote for? (I think i saw this in the West Wing..)Shniken1 (talk) 00:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This question was raised yesterday. Lantzy talk 02:05, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Public domain government reports

edit

Is it possible to get old (public domain) CIA observer (or other government agency) reports detailing events like cold war era atomic bomb tests or other historical events? Where could I find these, and if they are available are they in the public domain (like US gov. images)? Thanks, --S.dedalus (talk) 00:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All works by the US federal government are public domain. F (talk) 02:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It depends on the agency who made them. Contractor reports (like those usually made for the Department of Energy, or by DOE national labs) can have their own independent copyright status and are not "works of the federal government" as defined in US copyright law.
As to finding reports, there are a number of places online that have such things. It really depends on what type of reports you want. A few sources I have used in my research include:
As you can see, there are a lot of miscellaneous databases out there. It really depends what you are looking for. No one database has anything like a complete set, and even with these millions of pages online there's no substitute for archival work when it comes to telling a complete story. All of the content is in the public domain for the most part, though access to the databases is often subscription based. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 02:37, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that helps a lot! --S.dedalus (talk) 04:09, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contactless payment cards in various cultures

edit

I have been to these places with contactless payment cards in use: Hong Kong, Tokyo, Singapore, Macau and New Zealand.

From what I can see, only Hong Kong people will put their whole handbag/backpack with the card inside on the card reader. People in other places will only put their card, or wallet with card inside, on the reader. Why? What do people in other places do? Thanks F (talk) 02:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Real or Fake

edit

I found this video on Youtube. It shows "a 8 year old" kid having his hand crushed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Yhuw2NV7JU&feature=related

I think it is fake because I think that in Iran, children has to reach puberty before they can be punished in this manner. Is there a way to find out if this is fake. 202.168.50.40 (talk) 04:35, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to Islamic Sharia law the amputation of a hand is a proper punishment for some forms of theft. However you are correct, this punishment apparently can only be carried out if the thief is an adult and sane. Still there are plenty of extremists in every religion and culture that let neither the truth nor human decency stand it the way of them doing what they want. --S.dedalus (talk) 04:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And according to the law of Snopes, it's a gang of street hustlers. A staged event. ---Sluzzelin talk 05:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Magician Criss Angel did the same trick with the benefit of better recording equipment and a steamroller. [1] --Haikon 01:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How can we consider them as rapists and criminals?

edit

This isn't a reference desk question. If you want to debate the categorisation of an article, do it on that article's talk page. FiggyBee (talk) 06:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Black Death

edit

The black death did not seem to have the same impact in terms of religious belief (mass hysteia etc.) in Britain as it did in the rest of Europe. What effect, if any, did it have?Zoe8 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 06:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"What effect, if any?" Haha, how homework-y...and what makes you say there was less of a religious impact? There was plenty of hysteria in Britain. One fun answer is that it also led to a shortage of labour, and thereby the collapse of feudalism (well...sort of). But read Black Plague, it should be very helpful. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is true that England did not witness some of the things that arose in the wake of the contagion on the Continent, the 'hysterical' elements you allude to, Zoe, which included pogroms, apocalyptic preaching and the upsurge in the Flagellant movement. The chief impact, paradoxically, was a weakening in the authority of the church. So many priests and clerics died that the gap in numbers had to be made good by the hasty ordination of men hardly suited to the task. The resulting decline in educational and moral standards among the clergy saw an upsurge in anticlericalism among the laity. By the end of the century this was such a well-established feature of English social life that it provided rich ground for the Lollards, a proto-reform movement. Even if they were not attracted by new heretical ideas many people adopted an attitude of morbid scepticism, which eventually found expression in the Danse Macabre, arguably one of the great defining images of the late Middle Ages. Clio the Muse (talk) 23:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It inspired a very funny scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail in which a cart driver cries out "Bring out your dead".

But seriously, perhaps the most significant effect the Black Death had on England took place about 30 years later. This may seem at first to be a silly thing to say, but the English peasants' revolt of 1381 took place as a direct result of the fact that the Black Death killed off an inordinately larger percentage of the working classes in England than it did of the more affluent classes. As a result of that, after the Black Death workers were in greater demand, and they could demand higher wages, which led in turn to a spiraling inflation. The rich could not afford to pay their workers or to afford to live as they did before the Black Death. To try to counter this, several laws were passed to try to set workers' wages back to what they had been prior to the Black Death, as well as to raise taxes and fines aimed primarily at workers. The result of all this was the Peasant's Rebellion, which according to some historians (including the noted Barbara Tuchman in her book A Distant Mirror), marked the very beginnings of what was to become the awareness of the working class in England. -- Saukkomies 16:15, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Officialy the best sporting nation

edit

Im my country everyone say we are now officialy best nation in sports,since we have the top rated tenis players(Number 2 in man,number 2 and number 4 in woman and number 3 in mixed doubles),we are champions of world in waterpolo,champions in volleyball,were champions of world in basketball 5 time,and been had great rusults in football.

I know that some bigger countries(like USA and Russia) have more medals,but comparing TO THE NUMBER OF POPULATION,are we the best nation in Sports?

Also,where can I see the list?

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.105.18.229 (talk) 07:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which country is "we"? We're very, very good, but we're still not mind-readers ... yet. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Serbia, from the IP-address. User:Krator (t c) 08:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I could have looked it up, too, if I knew how. I was hoping to remind people generally to be just that little bit clearer with their questions, and to remember this is an international site. It's not too unreasonable to expect people who want to know something about a particular country to actually state its (? her) name. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at Olympic games medals, then you are way down the list. In Athens 2004, The Bahamas comes in top with 6.3 total medals per million population. Second is Australia (2.4), then Cuba (2.3). Serbia and Montenegro was 47th with 0.24 total medals per million population. [2] Sorry to disappoint, but even Mongolia beat you :-( Rockpocket 08:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Even among East European nations, the number of medals per unit population is much higher in Romania. Relata refero (talk) 09:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In the 2004 olympics, counting total medals of all countries with at least one gold, the Bahamas wins the medals per capita race, with two medals out of a population of about 300,000. Among countries with at least five total medals, Cuba wins with about 2.5 medals per million. Wrad (talk) 17:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, as the source above shows, Australia beats Cuba among countries with at least 5 medals. Rockpocket 18:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's close, but no. Australia takes second with one medal per 480,000 population. Cuba takes first with one per 400,000 population. Wrad (talk) 18:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I'm counting current population. oops Wrad (talk) 18:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


No,but I didnt mean the Olympic Games,I though like Championships,like we are current Champions of the world in Waterpolo,in Valleyball we are Champions of the world,in Basketball we were Champions of the world more time then anyone else and we beat "Dream-team" few times,in Football we played in semi-finals of world cup 2 times and also once in final of European Cup and won Olympic Games,in Club Football our team(Red Star) won the Champions League and Intercontinental Cup in 1991,in Tenis NOVAK DJOKOVIC just won Australian Open,NENAD ZIMONJIC also just won Australian Open doubles,ANA IVANOVIC played in final of Australian Open this year and JELENA JANKOVIC played in semi-finals this year.

Thats why everyone in my country say that we are officialy the best sport nation in the world(Of course,not the olympic games,but real Championships)...So,after all the succes that I mentioned,is there any other nation wich have succes in so many different sports? Also,another thing that interests me is,if we are first nation in Sports,who is the second and third one??

Thank you very much

77.105.18.39 (talk) 00:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities&action=submit Editing Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities - Preview - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[reply]

It's impossible to say if one country is better than another at sports in general. Every country plays different sports. In the U.S., many of the best athletes play American football, a sport played very little outside of the U.S. Perhaps if those athletes were raised to play soccer or team handball, the U.S. would dominate international competition in those sports. Maybe, maybe not. India is terrible in the Olympics but has the world's third-ranked cricket team. Norway rocks in the Winter Olympics, but their ice hockey team is nothing compared to those of Sweden and Finland. So how do you judge who's "number one?" -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:35, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Very simple. You choose whichever sports your own country is best at, and say that all the others are unimportant. Just don't expect to convince anyone else! --Anonymous, 03:27 UTC, January 30, 2008.

Well,I didnt mean cricket,rugby,american football,hockey and winter sports...I ment real sports that are played in the most of the world,like football,basketball,tenis,volleyball,waterpolo... 77.105.28.224 (talk) 05:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You do realise that cricket is played by 1.5 billion people right? That's a lot more than volleyball or waterpolo, and probably more than tennis. Relata refero (talk) 06:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes,but cricket in not played in Europe at all except in UK and I think that none of other countries even know the rules...But football,basketball,tenis,those sport are played in all countries,even in countries far away like US and A and Australia,but also in Europe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.105.60.83 (talk) 12:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Netherlands national cricket team and Ireland cricket team would appear to discount that theory.
Also, how good is your country at table tennis, because that beats football, tennis and waterpolo in numbers of competitors. The bottom is line that if you wish to limit your selection an arbitrary group of sports that you particular country plays well, then there is every chance that your country will be the best in the word. The Olympics is the best barometer since it collects a diverse groups of sports and permits the entire world to compete together, rather than in geographical limitations. Rockpocket 18:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Far be it from an Englishman to criticise the footballing record of other nations, but Serbia have only reached the quarter-finals of the World Cup once since 1962 (most of that time competing as Yugoslavia), and, like England, failed to qualify for Euro 2008. Hammer Raccoon (talk) 21:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
77.105, how DARE you suggest that cricket is not a real sport! That remark really hit me for a six. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your country can't be top because they've never won a World Series hotclaws 01:28, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translations of Plato's Republic

edit

As title, I am looking for a good translation (English) of Plato's Republic. To give some kind of clue of what I want before turning to ambiguities, Barnes' translation of Aristotle is just about right for me for that philosopher. User:Krator (t c) 08:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a list of translations at The Republic. Apparently the one by Tom Griffith and G.R.F. Ferrari is pretty good. Adam Bishop (talk) 17:24, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also there's the 'squashed' verison (http://www.sqapo.com/plato.htm) which is perhaps an easier read for pure 'interest' reasons (but less so for detailed studying). ny156uk (talk) 17:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As Adam Bishop states, the one by Tom Griffith and G. R. F Ferrari is pretty good. I own a copy and am holding it as we speak, it is formatting as an almost coffee-house-esque chat. SGGH speak! 23:49, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I vote for C.D.C. Reeve's translation, but since I did take a few classes under him I asked a friend who has not studied (grad level Classics) under any of the relevant authors and he also says Reeve's is the best. Reeve's revision of Grube's translation has the ISBN 0872201368, and Reeve's own translation has the ISBN 0872207366.--droptone (talk) 17:20, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proper names

edit

Senator Edward Moore Kennedy is also called "Ted" Kennedy. Where does the name Ted come from?

His brother John also was called "Jack." Why?

4.242.141.157 (talk) 09:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)Al Williams[reply]

Ted is a very common nickname for Edward. And Jack is sometimes used as a diminutive of John, although it is increasingly being used as a name in its own right as well. --Richardrj talk email 09:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I thought Ted was a nickname for Theodore... —Keenan Pepper 13:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It can be - as in Teddy Roosevelt or Ted Logan. But it can also be short for Edward (Ted Heath, for example), or indeed (according to our Ted article) for Edwin. Gandalf61 (talk) 13:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's quite common for diminutives not to start with the same letter as the full name: Margaret -> Peggy, Robert -> Bobby (another Kennedy!), Roger -> Hodge (once upon a time), Mary -> Polly, Richard -> Dick. I'm sure there's a name for this phenomenon but I can't remember it off-hand. (This doesn't include cases where the start of the name has obviously been truncated, e.g. Christine -> Tina) AndrewWTaylor (talk) 17:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've known "Molly" to be a variant for "Mary", but not "Polly"; that's a new one for me, as is "Hodge" for "Roger". Bielle (talk) 19:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect some of these are variants on existing diminutives, e.g. Mary -> Molly -> Polly. Edward -> Ed -> Ted. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 00:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder what this guy's friends call him. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Rog", evidently. Lantzy talk 22:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Ned" is also a nickname for Edward. Corvus cornixtalk 22:24, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note that in almost all the examples Andrew gives, the pet form starts with a plosive consonant. I'm sure this is not an accident, though I haven't an explanation. But it seems to be a characteristic pattern (not the only one) for hypocoristics in English to substitute a less sonorous initial consonant for a more sonorous one. (Different languages have different characteristic patterns: Russian often uses -ya even for masculine names, though that ending is normally feminine; and French has a pattern almost unknown in English of reduplicating a syllable of the name.) --ColinFine (talk) 00:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and also it seems that the replacing consonant has about the same place of articulation - e.g. M and P are both labial. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 09:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't work for 'Bob' or 'Dick'. --ColinFine (talk) 00:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It does for Richard/Dick - R and D are both alveolar consonants. And it seems that Dob is another (older) diminutive of Robert - presumably the origin of surnames like Dobbs and Dobson. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 10:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Odon von Horvath

edit

Is there an English translation of Jugend Ohne Gott by Odon von Horvath? Our article makes no mention of one, and book searches have failed to turn one up, but perhaps one of the German experts on here knows differently...? Many thanks. --Richardrj talk email 09:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to have been translated by R. Wills Thomas in 1938. The original title of the translation appears to have been The Age of the Fish. Heinemann Educational Books ISBN 0-434-34810-4. I don't know whether it's currently in print. ---Sluzzelin talk 09:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks - found a second hand copy on Abebooks. --Richardrj talk email 10:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How important is $100 to an average American?

edit

Even today, comparing incomes and income disparities between various nations is very difficult. Previously, we had figures based on Purchasing power parity because nominal exchange rate based calculations were not meaningful. But, recently, even they are becoming unreliable because of the confusion created by World Bank. In one day, they reduced per capita incomes of many countries including China and India by half citing some reasons. Russia's and some eastern European countries' incomes were down by 20% in a moment. As a person not living in US, I am asking this. Please explain me how important is $100 for an average American so that I can compare your answers and get some idea of parity between currencies. (Meanwhile, I thank World bank for creating that confusion so that people like me know at least now how unreliable these calculations were. I would have believed in World Bank's calculations even now if those confusion was not there) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.109.31 (talk) 16:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on where you live, but for me, $100 can pay for a month's groceries or two months health insurance or four months car insurance. Wrad (talk) 17:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How about using the Big Mac index (http://www.economist.com/markets/bigmac/) as a start. Also look at the article on purchasing power parity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity) for more information around the quality of these things as an indicator. ny156uk (talk) 17:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For a Canadian (or for this one, at any rate) and given that our dollar is just about at par with the US one, $100.00 buys one fill-up of our Ford 150 van, one month's car insurance on our oldest car, and 3-4 days' oil heat for the house if the thermometre stays below freezing. Like Mareino, we spend about $100 per month, per person, for groceries (not including non-food items, or wine and beer), but that swanky meal for two would be more like $120 than $100. Bielle (talk) 19:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This varies a lot regionally within the United States. In some parts of the United States, most people earn less than $100 a day, so $100 represents 10-15 hours of work. In these same lower-income areas, it is possible to rent a small apartment (flat) for about $500 a month, so $100 pays for almost a week's lodging. In other parts of the United States, average pay and costs are higher. For example, in Boston, where I live, people probably earn an average of about $200 a day, so $100 represents just four hours of work. Here, it is hard to find a tiny apartment (flat) for less than $1000 a month, so $100 represents no more than three day's lodging. People here probably spend close to $50 a week on groceries, even though they eat maybe 2-3 meals a week in restaurants, so $100 buys not even 2 weeks worth of food. A typical restaurant meal, including taxes and tip, is about $25, and a "swanky" meal for two could be anywhere from $100 to $600. Marco polo (talk) 20:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Let us (sigh) not talk about rents in Manhattan. Relata refero (talk) 06:33, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A note about the "confusing" World Bank revision: the recent revision in PPP-rates (and thus revision of global economic growth for the last few years) was due to new data supplied by the International Comparison Program, which was a program that conducted a comprehensive reassessment of PPP values (among other things). It was not an arbitrary revision "for some reason" - the program was planned and conducted because the existing figures were often out of date or inaccurate. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an American, but $100 is approximatley my weekly income after housing costs (but before utilities). DuncanHill (talk) 23:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It will cost $100 for each of the following things in most places in the US:
* A trick with a prostitute
* A very nice meal for two at a good restaurant, including champagne and deserts
* A one-night stay for two in a decent motel
* A one-hour massage for two, plus mudpacks
* A co-pay for a doctor's visit and a prescription for an antibiotic for the STD you contracted from doing all the previous things.
-- Saukkomies 16:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, can someone loan me 500 bucks? —Kevin Myers 13:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I spend $40 a week on food, $30 on gas, and $50 on pointless trivialties. I regularly spend $100 on impulse buys (the latest being an antique pocket watch), so I'd say that $100 isn't that important to me. Of course, this is all relative. 5 years ago $100 would have seemed like a fortune to me. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 19:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Corporate jet setters

edit

Which nation is considered the best in the world of academics? In terms of escalation in corporate scenario... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Garb wire (talk • contribs) 17:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


How would one measure "best": the country with the most university students; the one with the most Ph.D.s? And I am also puzzled by the expression "in terms of escalation in corporate scenario"? Do you mean the measurement should be in terms of what the corporate world demands now, by way of formal education? As you see, I have more questions than answers. Bielle (talk) 20:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I puzzled over this question for a while and came to the conclusion the OP was asking which country do academics consider to the the "best" for escalation up the corporate ladder (I could be totally wrong, though). Rockpocket 21:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose it is the other way round: he is asking which country do corporations consider to be the best academically. Mr.K. (talk) 15:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think what the OP is asking is this: "I want to go to college, and I want to do so in order that I can get the best chance at rising as quickly as possible up the corporate ladder. So, which country has the best colleges for helping someone like me get to the top the quickest?" -- Saukkomies 15:32, 1 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.68.25.95 (talk) [reply]

South America: Homicide Information

edit

What resources would you recommend which will give me a good idea of the number of Americans murdered in South American countries vs total murders in that same country? I am thinking of taking a 9 month trip down there and would like to have some idea of risk. --Yoyoceramic (talk) 20:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could ask the US embassies in the countries you intend to visit. They should have some good idea. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I don't believe you have to know the number of Americans murdered down there vs total number of murders, since probably they are not targeting Americans. Try better number of murdered Americans vs. sound-and-safe American tourists within a time-frame. Or murdered tourists/not murdered tourists. Anyway check this link for official warnings.Mr.K. (talk) 20:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Statistically, most murders are committed by people who know the victim intimately, (close friends and family members). So go travelling, the further away you are from that treacherous lot, the safer you'll be!! ^_^ Ninebucks (talk) 20:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dark Complexion?

edit

Hello,

Over the past year in literature I have read, the description "dark complexion" has turned up. I know that in modern contexts it generally refers to ethnicity, yet the books I have read, such as Jane Eyre, have Caucasian characters. Also on your page about Anne Boleyn it says that some referred to her as having a "dark complexion," when she was most assuredly white.

Thank you for your time —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.106.224.20 (talk) 21:54, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if this is a question or a comment. I'll respond anyway. Nobody's ever suggested Anne Boleyn was not "white" in the sense of being Caucasian. It's just that her skin may have been noticeably darker than other "white" people. Everyone has a different and unique skin colour, and skin colour can change with exposure to sun, disease etc, but it would be absurd and impractical to scientifically categorise the precise tone of everyone's skin, so instead we go for broad descriptions - "white", "black", etc. Spaniards are generally considered Caucasian too, hence they're "white", but their skin tends to be darker than those of Finns, for example. One Spaniard in a roomful of Finns would be visually distinctive, even apart from factors such as facial shape, hair colour etc. They'd say he/she was of a "dark complexion", compared with them, without any suggestion he/she was negroid. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In a (forgotten) reference to complexion or "colouring" in medieval England, someone with medium to light brown hair was regarded as "dark" in colouring. Someone "golden" was blond, and "fair" was very light blond. Julia Rossi (talk) 00:22, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the time of Jame Eyre and Anne Boleyn (and for much of the history of the Middle Ages up to the 20th Century), it was considered by much of European (including English) society to be unfashionable to have a tan. This meant that the person would be of a lower, working class. Women tried to stay out of the sun as much as possible, including going to the bother of carrying parasols with them to protect their skin from the sun's rays whenever they went outside on a sunny day. The ideal was a completely pale skin that was untouched by any tint of color (except for the reddish color of a blush). So, for anyone who had a natural tint to their skin, they went to great lengths to try to cover it up, including powdering their faces. Because of the latent racial vestiges in England that were carried over from the time when Britain was settled by Romans (among others), there are occasional instances when individuals are born in England who, although they are as completely "British" as the Queen herself, look like they might have been born in Rome or Naples instead of London because of their darker complexion. Some examples of this would be: John Lennon, Ringo Starr, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Keith Richards and Mick Jagger. -- Saukkomies 15:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the Queen German? Julia Rossi (talk) 00:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hah! Exactly! So if the Queen is part German, then those of her British citizens who are of mixed blood are just as "British" as she. -- Saukkomies 15:34, February 2008 (UTC)
Only if you consider someone's nationality/ethnicity/whatever to depend on their ancestry during one particular window of time. She's as German as the Kaiser was British. Skittle (talk) 18:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
She was dark colouring though with untanned skin, so I guess it helps to have a bullet proof limo with enhanced lighting and a certain amount of delusion among the peasants about royal "fairness" – sure beats face powder. Julia Rossi (talk) 07:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nurse capill

edit

I would like history of this nurse, executed by germany during the 1st world war. I am not sure if this is the right spelling of her surname? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.194.135 (talk) 21:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has an article on Edith Cavell. ---Sluzzelin talk 22:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2008_January_29&oldid=1136445267"