This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 90.199.210.77 (talk) at 07:48, 13 May 2023 (→Westminster Abbey). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 07:48, 13 May 2023 by 90.199.210.77 (talk) (→Westminster Abbey)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
of the Misplaced Pages reference desk. skip to bottom Select a section: Shortcut Want a faster answer?
Main page: Help searching Misplaced Pages
How can I get my question answered?
- Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
- Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
- Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
- Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
- Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
- Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.
How do I answer a question?
Main page: Misplaced Pages:Reference desk/Guidelines
- The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
May 6
Prime Minister with non-English accent
Has there ever been a British Prime Minister with a Welsh, Scottish or Northern Irish accent? 86.130.77.121 (talk) 18:06, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- Accents are tricky, and any answer may come down to subjective judgement. I don't think it is unreasonable to suggest though that Lloyd George had more than a trace of a Welsh accent, albeit one heavily influenced by received pronunciation. Listen to this British Pathé recording from 1931. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:14, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- I'm listening to a bit of Gordon Brown and there seem to be hints of a Scottish accent (a pretty flat "know", for instance), but disappointingly weak given that he was born in Glasgow and to my knowledge spent most of his life in Scotland. --Wrongfilter (talk) 18:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- To me, an Englishman who lived in Scotland for several years, Brown's Scottish accent was always pretty obvious. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.213.18.208 (talk) 19:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- I'd say that Ramsay MacDonald had more of an accent than Brown. Like Lloyd George though, strong RP elements too? It is entirely possible that both Lloyd George and MacDonald's accents varied noticeably with register. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:01, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- Tony Blair is also Scottish. Discuss. Hayttom (talk) 01:06, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- "Discuss."
- All right, although it doesn't directly answer the original question (i.e. I'm probably starting a diversionary tangent), over half a dozen British Prime Ministers since 1900 have been Scots, although most of them with Received Pronunciation from family, public schools or Oxbridge (e.g. Macmillan, Blair and Cameron):
- Arthur James Balfour
- Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman
- Andrew Bonar Law
- James Ramsay MacDonald †
- Harold Macmillan
- Sir Alec Douglas-Home (Lord Home)
- Tony Blair
- Gordon Brown
- David Cameron
- † My parents liked to quote Ramsay MacDonald's appreciation of Robert Burns on the record you can hear here (10 min. total) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbVGIqxhe0s The accent (perhaps because of the subject or the audience, no doubt on Burns' Night) is, to my ear, far more Scottish than anything else. —— Shakescene (talk) 02:50, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- You can hear the voices of 15 UK Prime Ministers at this Sporcle quiz (plus pointers to others going back to Gladstone in the comments section): https://www.sporcle.com/games/dolebanana/righthonourableprimeminister
- You can also hear samples (at least one full sentence) of Gladstone, Asquith, Lloyd George and everyone from Baldwin to Theresa May here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hP0h4AP0Voo.
- —— Shakescene (talk) 03:20, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, David Lloyd George had a recognisably Welsh accent. Alansplodge (talk) 11:13, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- David Lloyd George was born in England, but should certainly be considered Welsh. He is the only PM whose native tongue was not English. Hayttom (talk) 13:42, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- I watch the speeches, interviews and conversations of Harold Macmillan, Alec Douglas-Home, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron on Youtube and none of them sounded Scottish. 86.130.77.121 (talk) 18:59, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- It would be extremely surprising if any of Macmillan, Douglas-Home or Cameron had a Scottish accent considering they were born in London. Blair was born in Edinburgh but his family moved to England when he was 5 and he spent most of his time before that in Australia. Brown did have a Scottish accent. Valenciano (talk) 19:51, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- I watch the speeches, interviews and conversations of Harold Macmillan, Alec Douglas-Home, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron on Youtube and none of them sounded Scottish. 86.130.77.121 (talk) 18:59, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Tony Blair is also Scottish. Discuss. Hayttom (talk) 01:06, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- I'm listening to a bit of Gordon Brown and there seem to be hints of a Scottish accent (a pretty flat "know", for instance), but disappointingly weak given that he was born in Glasgow and to my knowledge spent most of his life in Scotland. --Wrongfilter (talk) 18:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Not sure how David Cameron made that list, except by part of his ancestry, which includes many nationalities. --Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing! 19:55, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- That was a list I composed from my own mind and memory, rather than from any authoritative source. However the Misplaced Pages article about David Cameron does say this:
- Cameron's father, Ian, was born at Blairmore House near Huntly, Aberdeenshire, and died near Toulon, France, on 8 September 2010; Ian was born with both legs deformed, and underwent repeated operations to correct this. Blairmore was built by Cameron's great-great-grandfather, Alexander Geddes, who had made a fortune in the grain trade in Chicago, Illinois, before returning to Scotland in the 1880s. Blairmore was sold soon after Ian's birth.
- Cameron has said, "On my mother's side of the family, her mother was a Llewellyn, so Welsh. I'm a real mixture of Scottish, Welsh, and English." He has also referenced the German Jewish ancestry of one of his great-grandfathers, Arthur Levita, a descendant of the Yiddish author Elia Levita.
- —— Shakescene (talk) 18:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
References
- "David Cameron and Slains Castle". The North Scotland Beehive. Aberdeen: Aberdeen Civic Society. 2 March 2006. Archived from the original on 17 August 2007.
- "Marriages". The Times. London. 24 July 1905. p. 1. Retrieved 22 March 2013.(subscription required)
- ^ Howker, Ed; Malik, Shiv (20 April 2012). "David Cameron's family fortune: the Jersey, Panama and Geneva connection". The Guardian. Retrieved 14 August 2016.
- Clark, Ross (26 January 2002). "Highlands for the high life". The Daily Telegraph. London, England. Archived from the original on 9 December 2012. Retrieved 4 September 2007.
- Martin, Iain; Porter, Andrew (10 December 2007). "David Cameron flies the flag for Britain". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on 10 January 2022. Retrieved 10 October 2019.
- "David Cameron: Jewish Care". SayIt.
- Holehouse, Matthew (12 March 2014). "David Cameron tells Israelis about his Jewish ancestors". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 10 October 2019.
May 7
Non-English Royal family members
Are any members of the British Royal family Welsh, Scottish, Irish or American? 86.130.77.121 (talk) 20:56, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- You mean by birth? Sure. Lots. Nanonic (talk) 21:20, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother, although born in London, was from an ancient Scottish family, the Earls of Strathmore and Kinghorne, descendants of John Lyon, Lord of Glamis who was Lord High Chamberlain of Scotland in the 14th-century. Otherwise, the now abandoned custom that heirs to the throne should only marry into other royal families has tended to mean unions with continental European (often German) royals. In theory the British Royal Family claim somewhat tenuous descent from the Scottish House of Stewart, and even more tenuously, from Brian Boru, whose harp adorns the Royal Standard. Alansplodge (talk) 11:20, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Not forgetting the American Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Wallis, Duchess of Windsor who have had somewhat troubled relationships with the family that they married into. Alansplodge (talk) 11:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, and Henry VII of England was born in Wales to a Welsh family in 1457. The present Windsors are distantly related. Alansplodge (talk) 16:50, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Not forgetting the American Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Wallis, Duchess of Windsor who have had somewhat troubled relationships with the family that they married into. Alansplodge (talk) 11:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother, although born in London, was from an ancient Scottish family, the Earls of Strathmore and Kinghorne, descendants of John Lyon, Lord of Glamis who was Lord High Chamberlain of Scotland in the 14th-century. Otherwise, the now abandoned custom that heirs to the throne should only marry into other royal families has tended to mean unions with continental European (often German) royals. In theory the British Royal Family claim somewhat tenuous descent from the Scottish House of Stewart, and even more tenuously, from Brian Boru, whose harp adorns the Royal Standard. Alansplodge (talk) 11:20, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Two more of the living people listed at British royal family are the Countess of Snowdon born in Ireland and Princess Lilibet, also born in the U.S.A.70.67.193.176 (talk) 14:44, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- The Armstrong-Joneses are Welsh/German-Jewish. DuncanHill (talk) 18:50, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- All of Elizabeth II's descendants share Greek and Danish ancestry from Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. -- Verbarson edits 18:03, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Defining ethnicity by one's ancestors is massively problematic even over the course of only a small number of generations. I'm not sure that Prince William or Prince Harry earnestly self-identify as Greek or interact with other people in Greek communities in a way to indicate that they are ethnically Greek in any meaningful sense. Ethnicity is primarily as a social and cultural and (and often linguistic) community, and by one's own participation in that community. Distant ancestors one never met who may have been part of said community do not magically pass that on to one's descendents (and that also raises issues as to how ethnicities evolve; at one point does a new ethnicity emerge, at one point does an ethnicity no longer resemble earlier ethnicities that one cannot say there is any meaningful continuity. Italians aren't Etruscans, after all.) --Jayron32 18:34, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Agreed (and note that the Greek royal family were mostly Danish but of German extraction). Alansplodge (talk) 16:55, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Well yes, but the caveat about ancestral ethnicity still holds. George I of Greece was raised Danish, but Constantine I of Greece was absolutely raised as a Greek, and it would be hard to argue that the next generation was not also so raised. --Jayron32 18:32, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Jayron32 -- An example which affects a large number of people (though not connected to royalty), is that the ancestors of a majority of U.S. Jews probably came from areas which are now part of Germany, Poland, and Ukraine, but (except for a few recent immigrants and special cases) they do not generally consider themselves to be German-American, Polish-American, or Ukrainian-American, nor are they generally considered to be such by self-identified German-Americans, Polish-Americans, or Ukrainian-Americans... AnonMoos (talk) 22:43, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Right, because residency does not equal ethnicity. Ethnicity involves interaction within and among a community, and Jewish people in central and eastern Europe were ostracized from the majority communities within the countries they lived in, so they established their own communities in those places. It is similar among ostracized communities in lots of places (African Americans, Romani, etc.) --Jayron32 11:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Ostracised or simply isolated? Sometimes it is the minority groups themselves which shun contact with the "outside" world for instance in dress, language or behaviour. Were Jews in eastern Europe rejected by society or did they reject the society? Likewise many itinerant groups, such as (but not limited to) Romani, in modern societies consciously reject intermingling and keep their own culture. A close analysis of the situation often reveals mistrust and misunderstanding by both the minority and majority groups. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:38, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- No, they were deliberately isolated by the majority community. Anti-jewish laws and social practices were common throughout Europe (not just eastern Europe) for centuries. Antisemitism is centuries old, and widespread. Don't fall into the narrative of "they want to be oppressed". Pogroms, ghettos, Jewish disabilities, and the like are enforced by the majority culture, not the choice of the oppressed. --Jayron32 11:54, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, but you've slightly missed the point. I'm not disputing that pogroms, disabilities and antisemitism did (and unfortunately still does) exist. Nor do I think that any group would "want to be oppressed". What I was pointing out was that the isolationism can come from both sides and build up the mistrust, misunderstanding and ultimately conflict. A group that avoids contact and adopts ways of dress, language, behaviour and religion that are at odds with the majority community will ultimately be seen as "other" and outside. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:10, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Only if the members of the majority community treat them as deserving of lesser treatment for those differences. The marginalized are not ever to blame for their marginalization. Bigotry has no excuse, especially not "but they dress differently" or "but they speak a different language" or "but they worship differently". The majority community can allow them to their own means of dress, language, worship, etc. and does not have to force them to assimilate and lose these differences and they can also treat them with the same level of respect and dignity, and grant them equal access, that they accord members of their own community.--Jayron32 16:23, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, but you've slightly missed the point. I'm not disputing that pogroms, disabilities and antisemitism did (and unfortunately still does) exist. Nor do I think that any group would "want to be oppressed". What I was pointing out was that the isolationism can come from both sides and build up the mistrust, misunderstanding and ultimately conflict. A group that avoids contact and adopts ways of dress, language, behaviour and religion that are at odds with the majority community will ultimately be seen as "other" and outside. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:10, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- No, they were deliberately isolated by the majority community. Anti-jewish laws and social practices were common throughout Europe (not just eastern Europe) for centuries. Antisemitism is centuries old, and widespread. Don't fall into the narrative of "they want to be oppressed". Pogroms, ghettos, Jewish disabilities, and the like are enforced by the majority culture, not the choice of the oppressed. --Jayron32 11:54, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Ostracised or simply isolated? Sometimes it is the minority groups themselves which shun contact with the "outside" world for instance in dress, language or behaviour. Were Jews in eastern Europe rejected by society or did they reject the society? Likewise many itinerant groups, such as (but not limited to) Romani, in modern societies consciously reject intermingling and keep their own culture. A close analysis of the situation often reveals mistrust and misunderstanding by both the minority and majority groups. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:38, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Right, because residency does not equal ethnicity. Ethnicity involves interaction within and among a community, and Jewish people in central and eastern Europe were ostracized from the majority communities within the countries they lived in, so they established their own communities in those places. It is similar among ostracized communities in lots of places (African Americans, Romani, etc.) --Jayron32 11:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Agreed (and note that the Greek royal family were mostly Danish but of German extraction). Alansplodge (talk) 16:55, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Defining ethnicity by one's ancestors is massively problematic even over the course of only a small number of generations. I'm not sure that Prince William or Prince Harry earnestly self-identify as Greek or interact with other people in Greek communities in a way to indicate that they are ethnically Greek in any meaningful sense. Ethnicity is primarily as a social and cultural and (and often linguistic) community, and by one's own participation in that community. Distant ancestors one never met who may have been part of said community do not magically pass that on to one's descendents (and that also raises issues as to how ethnicities evolve; at one point does a new ethnicity emerge, at one point does an ethnicity no longer resemble earlier ethnicities that one cannot say there is any meaningful continuity. Italians aren't Etruscans, after all.) --Jayron32 18:34, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
May 8
Why does Taobao pay people to shake their phones?
As an aside to a proposal at WP:VPR, a user mentioned that "Taobao gives out roughly 10-50 cents for free every day in their 一起摇现金 promotion, where the user can shake their phone daily and get this small amount". Why? What does Taobao get out of paying people to shake their phones? (I asked the user, but he didn't know.) -sche (talk) 05:09, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- I guess it's about providing evidence that you use a certain app daily (exposing yourself to ads and stuff). If they just require you to open the app and tap something then you might get another app which fakes using the first app. If the registration of shaking is closely tied to the hardware and operating system then it may be harder to fake for an app. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:40, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- It's part of what is known as gamification of e-commerce; as explained in the Play games, win dopamine section of this article:
A lot of consumption and even labor, when gamified, can pretend it is not what it actually is This helps the users forget that they are consuming, instead believing they are playing.
The article only mentions the "Shake Your Phone" (and win win bags of coins) promotion in passing, but details the psycological and neurological effect of gamification in general. The "Shake your phone" seems to me like an initial step to increase user engagement in gamified activity. --136.56.52.157 (talk) 05:57, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- In short: shaking one's phone and winning something is a simple (and clever) way of triggering a consumer's reward system, thus making them feel good about Taobao This is probably cheaper and more effective in the long run than an ad campaign. 136.56.52.157 (talk) 06:54, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Looking for an article on the Carol Burnett/Trump civil case
I tried to look for an article on the Carol Burnett/Trump civil case here on Misplaced Pages, but found none. Could anyone help me find it? Perhaps it does not warrant an article? Star Lord - 星爵 (talk) 12:50, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- I can't even find information on any civil case between Carol Burnett and Trump outside of Misplaced Pages. Perhaps you misremembered something? --Jayron32 14:51, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Funny, Google got "About 3 320 000 results" Star Lord - 星爵 (talk) 21:18, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- It's mentioned in National Enquirer. No, probably doesn't warrant an article. I don't know why Jayron didn't find other references; searching for their two names and the name of the tabloid finds plenty of mentions of the 1981 case. --jpgordon 14:56, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- That article doesn't mention Trump at all. That's probably why I didn't find it. --Jayron32 14:57, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- yeah, and I might have not read the google hits well enough. So maybe I'll shut up on that part! --jpgordon 14:59, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- That article doesn't mention Trump at all. That's probably why I didn't find it. --Jayron32 14:57, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- It's mentioned in National Enquirer. No, probably doesn't warrant an article. I don't know why Jayron didn't find other references; searching for their two names and the name of the tabloid finds plenty of mentions of the 1981 case. --jpgordon 14:56, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- I spelled it wrongly, please forget this question :) Star Lord - 星爵 (talk) 21:27, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Did anyone survive the Genocide of Serbs in the Independent State of Croatia?
There are many notable Holocaust survivors, but are there any survivors to the Ustaše Genocide? 95.144.204.68 (talk) 14:42, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, the article explains it several places. Some of the Serbs were expelled, while others were allowed to remain following a conversion to Catholicism. --Jayron32 14:49, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Oh well thanks for your answer. 95.144.204.68 (talk) 15:03, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
May 9
Englishman in 1776 vs. Russian man in 1914
Is there any good way to measure whether an English farmer (assume does not own the land only works it) in 1776 or a Russian farmer in the same situation in 1914 had more rights? (Assume English ethnicity in England and Russian ethnicity in an area of European Russia which is majority ethnically Russian (for this purpose, a Jew is not of Russian ethnicity)) Also, is there anywhere in Europe in 1914 where a farmer would have had fewer rights than a Russian farmer? Naraht (talk) 18:22, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- You may wish to start from Constitutional Monarch and then Absolute Monarch to understand the rights and responsibilities of each society and its ruler. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 21:12, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Traditionally, most Russian peasants belonged to village communities (Obshchina) where individuals did not own land, but each household was assigned a certain amount of land to work. In England, there were distinctions between those who owned the land they farmed vs. tenant farmers vs. landless laborers, with a tendency for large landowners to increasingly dominate the rural system. In neither case was there much democracy in the modern sense, though an election was held in Russia in 1917 which Lenin prevented from having any effect (due to his hatred of democracy). It's quite striking that English "Yeomen" have traditionally been considered to be the foundation of the rural social fabric, while their approximate counterparts in Russia, the "Kulaks", were scapegoated by Stalin as the cause of all rural problems, and shot or deported to Siberia in large numbers... AnonMoos (talk) 23:47, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- There was a big difference between the large and prosperous farms found in England and the small subsistance peasant holdings found in Continental Europe. Agricultural reforms began in England in the 16th-century, tending to create larger and more efficient units, a process accelerated by the Agrarian Revolution and the Inclosures from about 1750. Not that everyone was wealthy in the English countryside; farms employed large numbers of poorly-paid labourers, who in other countries might have eked out a living on their own tiny patch of land. Alansplodge (talk) 18:15, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Now 'rights' is complex concept. Are we talking about what rights people had on paper or what rights they had in practice? In rural pre-industrial societies there was certainly a discrepancy between the two. Many farming communities living under non-constitutional regimes had significant negotiation capacity visavi rulers, if the surrounding terrain (mountains, hills, deep forests, etc) allowed them to resist the armed forces of the state. Rural communities in plain areas, where cavalry could move with ease, where much more vulnerable. --Soman (talk) 14:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Hmmm... Not sure that an 18th-century English farmer was very likely to be trampled by the cavalry. In later decades farmers were the cavalry; see the Yeomanry Cavalry. Alansplodge (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- In England in 1776 (as opposed to Wales, Scotland, and Ireland), there were few mountains (except in remote northern areas), and arguably also few semi-self-sufficient "peasants" in the traditional sense (as opposed to human cogs in the machine of commercial agriculture). Also, the upper and middle classes traditionally feared that any standing army would be used by the king to become a tyrant, so between wars there were usually relatively few professional soldiers in England (as opposed to volunteers, militia, etc). AnonMoos (talk) 22:41, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- The (marxist in a sense?) historian Barrington Moore wrote a great book on the different role of peasants in forming the different, western- fascist, eastern- authoritarian, western- democratic political structures of modernity in east and west: "Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy". And all of Moore's work is interesting, I think.--Ralfdetlef (talk) 04:54, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Boshin War
Who was the Imperial commander of the siege at Aizu-Wakamatsu Castle, and the one who meet Matsudaira Teru when she surrended? And the one from Ogaki domain's army who killed Nakano Takeko sometime before? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.207.208.103 (talk) 20:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Courtesy link: Boshin War (for anyone like me who had never heard of any of this, and wondered if it might refer to a fictional story). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.210.77 (talk) 11:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Aizuwakamatsu Castle states that it was under siege by the Satchō Alliance, while Battle of Aizu in the infobox says the top commander was Saionji Kinmochi, however I'm having a hard time finding a coherent narrative of the siege from any of these, or other, articles. --Jayron32 14:31, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, then can you find who was the commander of the Satchō Alliance during the siege, and the one for that military squadron when Nakano was killed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.51.132.94 (talk) 19:15, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- I literally just said, in the sentence you just replied to, that I tried and couldn't find anything. --Jayron32 12:00, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, then can you find who was the commander of the Satchō Alliance during the siege, and the one for that military squadron when Nakano was killed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.51.132.94 (talk) 19:15, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
May 10
German military item
What is this stick that Gerd von Rundstedt is holding in his right hand? Apparently the same stick of Keitel is lying on the table. I thought it's Marshal's baton, but I'm not sure. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 15:22, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- This similar one is described as WW2 German Fieldmarshall Interimstab Baton. It mentions that the item shown (reproduction) represents one of two batons presented, being the cheaper "interim" one for daily use, representing the more costly ceremonial baton, which presumably is seen at the signing. 136.56.52.157 (talk) 17:20, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Baton (military) is the article. It is the insignia of a field marshal in many countries, including the UK, although the Germans were most particular about carrying them about. Alansplodge (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- See also: Marotte? –Preceding uncalled-for satire added by 136.56.52.157 (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, that's why it's somewhat different, being a cheaper version. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 18:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Every French soldier has one in his knapsack. DuncanHill (talk) 14:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, that's why it's somewhat different, being a cheaper version. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 18:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- See also: Marotte? –Preceding uncalled-for satire added by 136.56.52.157 (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Baton (military) is the article. It is the insignia of a field marshal in many countries, including the UK, although the Germans were most particular about carrying them about. Alansplodge (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
Coronation of the British Monarch
The coronation of the monarch is meant to be the installation of a protestant king or queen. The accession declaration required the king to declare that he is a faithful protestant. Yet much of the coronation ceremony contained Catholic elements - the anointing, the enrobing of the sovereign in golden priestly garments, and the taking of communion. Why is a protestant ceremony infused with Roman Catholic components. I understand that historical continuity is essential for the ceremony but it does seem paradoxical. --Andrew 18:39, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Not all forms of Protestantism are the same. The Anglican church practices communion for example. Historically, the church has often been seen as divided between high church Anglicans who see ritual, priestly authority etc (closely mirroring Catholicism) as core to their faith, and low church Anglicans who's attitude to such matters is more closely aligned with other Protestant faiths. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:52, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- The historical context for this is the Elizabethan Religious Settlement at the end of the 16th-century, in which the Church of England and the Parliament of England were able to agree on a compromise so that while Protestant principles were broadly adhered to, many Catholic traditions could still be observed by those who wished. This brought an end to the Reformation in England, although the issues would surface again in the next century, leading to the English Civil War and the Glorious Revolution. Interestingly, the liturgy for the coronation of a British monarch barely altered during and after the Reformation, apart from being translated from Latin into English. The exception was the coronation oath, the text of which was decided by Parliament, and although it has now been toned down a bit, retains a strong emphasis on Protestantism and can't be altered without the consent of our political masters at Westminster. Alansplodge (talk) 20:03, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- See also the article High church. --Lambiam 20:28, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Although the present Archbishop, Justin Welby belongs to the Evangelical or "low church" wing of the Church of England. Like everything to do with British society, it ain't simple. Alansplodge (talk) 23:28, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- See also the article High church. --Lambiam 20:28, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- The historical context for this is the Elizabethan Religious Settlement at the end of the 16th-century, in which the Church of England and the Parliament of England were able to agree on a compromise so that while Protestant principles were broadly adhered to, many Catholic traditions could still be observed by those who wished. This brought an end to the Reformation in England, although the issues would surface again in the next century, leading to the English Civil War and the Glorious Revolution. Interestingly, the liturgy for the coronation of a British monarch barely altered during and after the Reformation, apart from being translated from Latin into English. The exception was the coronation oath, the text of which was decided by Parliament, and although it has now been toned down a bit, retains a strong emphasis on Protestantism and can't be altered without the consent of our political masters at Westminster. Alansplodge (talk) 20:03, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Remember that the Bible talks of the Kings of Israel being anointed… so that part (at least) is taken from traditions that pre-date even Roman Catholicism. Blueboar (talk) 00:25, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- I'm slightly puzzled by the characterisation of taking Communion as Roman Catholic. DuncanHill (talk) 00:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Just I’ve never been in a CoE church that’s ever offered anybody bread and wine before. Although I suppose Westminster Abbey is a royal peculiar —Andrew 09:55, 11 May 2023 (UTC)s
- Personal experience is not universal. Misplaced Pages has an article titled Anglican eucharistic theology, which may be useful for you to learn more about practices you may have not personally witnessed before. --Jayron32 11:58, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Looking at the parish church where I used to ring, it is a united benefice with two parishes. Communion is held on alternate Sundays between the two churches with simple Morning Worship on Sundays when the other church is having a communion service. Next I looked at the local cathedral: Sunday - communion 8am and 10:30, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday - communion at 8am, Thursday 8am and 1pm, Friday 8am, Saturday 9am. I then looked at the local Methodist church, communion at 10:30 next Sunday and it looks like monthly. What was unusual about the Coronation service was that only the ministers and Their Majesties were offered communion, in a normal service all are offered both the bread and the wine (or wafers, or non-alcoholic substitute). Remember that in Luke 22:19–20 Jesus is recorded as instructing his followers to repeat elements of the Last Supper in remembrance of him. Anyone who accepts the Gospels will follow this in some measure. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:01, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- In what context were you in a CofE church and not offered the Eucharist? If you just wandered in to e.g. look at the architecture you wouldn't just be offered bread and wine (unless perhaps if there was a church fete on), but the Eucharist is a standard part of many services. Iapetus (talk) 12:25, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- There are some CofE parishes churches that regularly have Morning Prayer (Anglican) on a Sunday morning and Eucharist only once a month. This was common 50 years ago but in my experience (certainly in the two parishes I have been involved in recently) it's now more usual to have a weekly Eucharist as the main service. Alansplodge (talk) 12:36, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I've done quite a lot of work on the various coronation articles and as far as I can tell, Communion was only ever taken by the officiants and the monarch and consort. The exceptions were Elizabeth I who fudged the issue (nobody knows whether she did or didn't take Communion) and James II who had that bit written-out because he was a Catholic. Imagine how long it would take to distribute Communion to the 8,000 at the 1953 coronation? Some earlier coronations had even larger congregations, taking some hours to get them all seated in temporary galleries. George III's coronation service lasted six hours, without having to get everybody up to the altar and back again. Alansplodge (talk) 12:36, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Well, yes. "What was unusual about the Coronation service ... in a normal service ...", but then who regards a coronation service as "normal". The last one hereabouts was 70 years ago! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 14:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Most Christian denominations practice Communion, though the label, the ritual and the frequency vary. There are exceptions, such as those listed at Eucharist § Non-observing denominations. The Pentecostal church I grew up attending had Communion every week, and also practised anointing of the sick with oil. No robes, though (but the minister wore a clerical collar for weddings). -- Verbarson edits 19:29, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Well, yes. "What was unusual about the Coronation service ... in a normal service ...", but then who regards a coronation service as "normal". The last one hereabouts was 70 years ago! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 14:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Just I’ve never been in a CoE church that’s ever offered anybody bread and wine before. Although I suppose Westminster Abbey is a royal peculiar —Andrew 09:55, 11 May 2023 (UTC)s
- The fact that a coronation does not happen very often does not make it "abnormal". ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 00:39, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- I think "extraordinary" is a better fit. Alansplodge (talk) 16:20, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- The fact that a coronation does not happen very often does not make it "abnormal". ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 00:39, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
Do Northeast Indians have Chinese and Nepalese ancestry?
A lot of Northeast Indians look like East Asians and the North East Region is close to China and Nepal. So are Northeast Indians of Chinese and Nepalese descent?95.144.204.68 (talk) 20:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Not in the sense that they would be migrants from modern-day nation states of China and Nepal. Many, but not all, of the peoples of North-East India speak Sino-Tibetan languages and thus have shared ancestry with many nationalities and ethnic groups in China, Thailand, Myanmar, etc.. There are different hypothesis about where the Sino-Tibetan urheimat would be located, but the dispersing of Sino-Tibetan languages is at least several thousands of years back. --Soman (talk) 20:45, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
May 12
Ravaillac and Damiens
Please, can you help me to find info about their descendants, from their execution until the end of XIX century? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.207.202.102 (talk) 10:47, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- Ravaillac was apparently unmarried, having previously applied to join various religious orders. Damiens' wife and daughter are not named in any source that I could find. Alansplodge (talk) 17:03, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- In the infobox in the Damiens article it says his wife's name was Elizabeth Molerienne. Abductive (reasoning) 02:22, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Inca plant dispersal success story
A while ago I was reading about a plant used by the Incas which the Spanish tried to exterminate. They appeared to succeed, but in modern times surviving plants were found in a remote location far outside the plant's native range, the Inca practice of dispersing 'backups' of important crops to all corners of the empire to ensure their survival having succeeded. I can't remember what plant it was! Anyone know? There are many 'lost crops of the Incas' the Spanish forbade cultivating, which are now being recultivated, but this one was thought to have been driven extinct, until survivals were rediscovered. Americanplantquestion (talk) 19:52, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
Westminster Abbey
I'm just wondering when it was originally built Westminster Abbey would have been a Catholic Church. How did it survive the Dissolution of the Monasteries and the Reformation. Our article on the abbey states that Henry VIII spared it by granting it cathedral status, but why, and how did it become an abbey again? Presumably, this has something to do with its status as the Coronation Church and about the time it was granted "royal peculiar" status? --Andrew 22:01, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- Most of the churches, abbeys and cathedrals in England* were originally built prior to the reformation. Therefore they would have been under the control of Rome at first. A tiny number were prior to the Synod of Whitby and would therefore originally have been Celtic, not Roman, but they were rebuilt after the Conquest in 1066. Following the Reformation ordinary churches became Anglican churches (big simplification here, this ignores the vicissitudes of Henry VIII and his daughter Mary). The cathedrals were retained as cathedrals, but those that were run by monks were reformed into secular cathedrals under a Dean and Chapter. Many abbeys were purely monastic but Westminster was granted the status (not actuality, there was never a bishop of Westminster) of a cathedral to preserve it from the Dissolution. It became a Royal Peculiar with a Dean and Chapter, but instead of a bishop it was under the direct control of the Crown. All cathedrals suffered under the Puritans who didn't accept bishops (again a gross simplification), but retained their status post-Restoration. That's around 1500 years of religious history reduced to one paragraph!
- *Without checking I cannot be sure about Scotland and Wales. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin of Sheffield (talk • contribs) 22:25, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- I suspect the OP is confused because the building we still call “Westminster Abby” isn’t actually an abby any more. There is no abbot, no monks etc. Blueboar (talk) 23:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, names tend to stick. The city of Newcastle, for example, is named for a castle built in 1080. Former Roman metropoli often still have evolved forms of their original names. Founded in the 9th century BCE, Carthage, from Punic qrt-ḥdšt and now locally called Qarṭāj, meant "New city". I wonder what is the oldest inhabited place in the world whose name still incorporates an element meaning "new"? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.210.77 (talk) 07:48, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
- I suspect the OP is confused because the building we still call “Westminster Abby” isn’t actually an abby any more. There is no abbot, no monks etc. Blueboar (talk) 23:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
May 13
Argue like you're right, listen like you're wrong
I heard an author on the radio mention a quote from her friend, Karl E. Weick. It's a good quote I'd like to add to his bio or wikiquote page, but I'm having trouble finding the original source document.
In The No Asshole Rule, Robert I. Sutton writes it as "Fight as if you are right, listen as if you are wrong." With a free preview in Google Books I can see he cites Weick's Small Wins paper but I don't have access to that paper to see if the quote is there or if that cite is supporting something else. I also wanted to make sure I got the original wording exactly.
Can anyone access these sources or put their finger on the original document? Thanks! -- Beland (talk) 07:45, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Categories: