Humanities desk
< November 8	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 10 >

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.

November 9[edit]

Recent United States presidential approval rating[edit]

Regarding United States presidential approval rating#Graphs:

The last two presidents show a pretty flat line. Why? Are there sources indicating that this is related to this echo chamber social media information thing? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:54, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Trump's is remarkably stable (unlike the subject himself). All I think that shows is that he has a solid core of supporters who don't care what blunders he commits and how many lies he spouts. Abraham Lincoln was right: You really can fool some of the people all of the time. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:36, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He got 46 percent of the popular vote in 2016, and his approval has tended to hover around that mark (or lower). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:54, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"He got 46 percent of the popular vote" Against 48% of the popular vote for Hillary Clinton. Barack Obama had received 51% of the popular vote in 2012, and Mitt Romney 47%. Trump is less popular than other major presidential candidates of the 2010s.

At least Trump performed better than John McCain, who received 45.7% of the popular vote in 2008. Dimadick (talk) 09:28, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, with Donald and Hillary, the majority of Americans didn't want either one of them. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:35, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For one so pedantic, you should realize that the "majority of Americans" have never expresed a preference for any candidate for any public office. DOR (HK) (talk) 22:27, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To put another way: a majority of American voters didn't want Trump, and a majority of American voters didn't want Hillary. Americans who don't bother to vote are not a factor. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:54, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The crowds decisions in politics doesn't satisfy even slightly the first 3 conditions for a wise crowd in The Wisdom of Crowds, the only thing it does have is a way of aggregating their opinions. Politics is mob rule. Dmcq (talk) 10:16, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Or, in this case, not a lone mob, but 50 of them. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:10, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:03, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Worst mass shooting in US history?[edit]

Is it correct to say that the Wounded Knee Massacre is the worst mass shooting in U.S. history? Most of the lists I've seen only focus on "modern" US history. For example, this list by CNN[1] omits everything before 1949. I'm interested in all of US history, not just recent events. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 04:18, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of those "how do you define your terms" issues. You can make cases either way, depending on how you define such fuzzy terms as "worst" and "mass" and "modern" and so on. There are perspectives in which the Wounded Knee incident was a military engagement, and as such, are usually excluded from the normal definition of "mass shooting" which usually means some private citizen going on an singular rampage. I'm not saying that definition is the only one a person could use, merely that you could make an argument either way. --Jayron 32 04:24, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very loosely some of the Civil War battles was probably more people being shot than Wounded Knee. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:38, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree with Jayron on this: "mass shooting" is generally an individual or a small group (e.g. Columbine High School massacre, with two shooters) going around shooting people at random or shooting a significant number of specific people who have been pre-selected as targets. My Lai, Wounded Knee, Gnadenhutten, and other situations performed by larger bodies of individuals (none of whom was individually responsible for an exceptional number of deaths) generally don't get considered. [Gnadenhutten obviously wasn't a shooting, but if it were, I'd argue against considering it a "mass shooting" for this reason.) Nyttend (talk) 18:31, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"You can make cases either way, depending on how you define such fuzzy terms as "worst" and "mass" and "modern" and so on"

"Modern" is easy. It corresponds to Modern history, which typically covers everything from the Fall of Constantinople (1453) to the present. Dimadick (talk) 18:49, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The OP said "modern US history". https://www.just-one-liners.com/the-difference-between-america-and-england-is-that-americans-think-100-years-is-a-long-time-while-the-english-think-100-miles-is-a-long-way/ PrimeHunter (talk) 22:46, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Death penalty for killing a cat in medieval England.[edit]

I once been told that in pre-christian England there was such penalty, with the reasoning that a single cat, throughout its life, eats such quantity of mice, that throughout their lives would have eat such quantity of wheat that would supply a person's entire life. Thus - killing a cat = killing a person.

However, I found no source for this (very nice) story. Does anyone can shed light on this?

אילן שמעוני (talk) 13:47, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Untrue. But, are you sure the story isn't actually about Ancient Egypt? Where cat worship might have had the same response. ——SerialNumber54129 13:52, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your title says "medieval", but your question asks for "pre-Christian". Cats in later medieval Europe were not held in high regard - see cat-burning for just a taste. I'm having trouble finding anything on the earlier pre-Christian situation with cats. It would likely be involved with Anglo-Saxon paganism to some extent, but our article says nothing of cats in that context. There is a huge amount of completely bogus information on the net regarding paganism, as many latter-day charlatans and nutjobs like to dress up their fanciful beliefs with words like "druid" and "pagan", so beware of anything you read online on this topic (i.e. double-check the source). Matt Deres (talk) 15:46, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ilan Shimoni -- you can look at the tale of Dick Whittington and his Cat for some quasi-medieval English emphasis on cats, but I doubt the death-penalty thing... AnonMoos (talk) 16:04, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The nearest approach to this that I can think of in early British history is a clause from the Blegywryd Redaction of the Laws of Hywel Dda, a 10th-century king of Deheubarth, laying down a fine for felicide:

The value of a cat which guards the king's barn, if killed or stolen: her head is set down on a clean level floor, and her tail is raised up, and wheat grains are poured over her until they hide the end of her tail. That will be her value.

Given the mention of the king's barn I suppose that represents the amount of wheat she would have saved the king. However Hywel Dda was Welsh, not English, and definitely not pre-Christian. --Antiquary (talk) 18:10, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's mentioned in History of cats: Laws of Hywel Dda. Killing a cat entailed a fine, which was higher if the cat had guarded the king's barn. See s:The_Laws_of_Howel_the_Good/Translation#cite_ref-325. --212.186.133.83 (talk) 08:01, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, no legal texts survive from the pagan Anglo-Saxon kings, so the answer must be "nobody knows". Strictly speaking, they were post-Christian as well as pre-Christian. When Saint Augustine of Canterbury arrived to convert the pagans of Kent, the first thing he did was drop into the local church which had been recently renovated. Alansplodge (talk) 13:07, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"When Saint Augustine of Canterbury arrived to convert the pagans of Kent"

Æthelberht of Kent (reigned c. 589 – 616) was not Christian yet, but his wife Bertha was a Frankish princess and Christian from birth. Followng her marriage, Bertha brought with her the bishop Liudhard as her chaplain. "Liudhard helped found ... the first Christian Saxon church in England".

Augustine's boss, Pope Gregory I asked for the help of several Frankish kings and queens in advancing this Christianization mission: Theuderic II, Theudebert II, Chlothar II, and Brunhilda of Austrasia. If Æthelberht denied the mission, he would risk his favorable relations with the Frankish courts. Kent was subordinate to them: "There is some evidence, including Gregory's letters to Frankish kings in support of the mission, that some of the Franks felt that they had a claim to overlordship over some of the southern British kingdoms at this time." Dimadick (talk) 19:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification Dimadick, I probably oversimplified the story. My point was that there was already a church in Canterbury - St Martin's is thought to date to the end of the Roman occupation and that Christianity wasn't something new to Britain at that time. Alansplodge (talk) 17:25, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Anglo-Saxons had not fully converted yet. The Romano-British culture had been under Christian influence since at least the 4th century. Dimadick (talk) 17:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR help please - Kenneth O. Morgan: My Histories[edit]

Could somebody please access the "Appendix - Main publications by Kenneth O. Morgan" in his autobiography Kenneth O. Morgan: My Histories for me? I need it to check the list on our article Kenneth O. Morgan, and to clarify a bibliographical tangle on another website, and to update my personal list of books needed, thank you. The book is on JSTOR at https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt17w8h53 DuncanHill (talk) 14:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The fine folks at WP:RX can help you with such requests. Matt Deres (talk) 15:37, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

borrow against future income stream?[edit]

If someone[2] currently has no income but is scheduled to start a high-paying out-of-town job in 3 months (it's guaranteed, can't really fall through), is there any serious difficulty in getting a bank loan for the equivalent of a few months salary to get settled into the new location? I'm finding the linked story a little bit surprising. Also, if someone is running for office I thought they were allowed to draw a salary from their campaign while they ran? Thanks. 173.228.123.166 (talk) 20:21, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That would depend on banking regulations and a given bank's policies about lending. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:56, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt there are regulations preventing it, so it's mostly a question of how banks (or maybe credit card issuers) are likely to react to such a request in practical terms. 173.228.123.166 (talk) 00:25, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You could try calling your local bank and posing the question. But don't be surprised if they also say that they would need more specific information before deciding yes or no. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:28, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As far as regulations are concerned, this isn't necessarily impossible. LeBron James#Basketball: Also during his senior year, James was the centerpiece of several controversies. For his 18th birthday, he skirted state amateur bylaws by accepting a Hummer H2 from his mother, who had secured a loan for the vehicle by utilizing LeBron's future earning power as an NBA superstar. (Obviously the loan to James' mother was somewhat riskier than a loan to this congressman-elect, since it would be much easier for James to suffer a freak injury preventing him from playing in the NBA than for her to suffer an event capable of preventing her from assuming office.) So unless banking regulations have changed markedly since 2002, the answer would depend entirely on the policies of the bank with which she consults. Nyttend (talk) 02:20, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not even if you could prove your glorious future 101%, cause in the worst case - your get your loan, spend it all and a week befor you start your rise to glory, you die in an accident and leave nothing of worth - that is a guaranteed 100% loss for the bank. There for Banks also always want additional security/pawn like your house, car, boat, pension contract. If you dont have that: ..very sorry blah, blah unfortunately blah, blah... --Kharon (talk) 02:39, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kharon, the lenders have actuaries who estimate the probability of something like that so they can price it into the loan. That part is completely routine. It's the reason credit card interest is higher than mortage interest. It's unsecured debt so you have to pay more for it. Question is whether she'd have serious probs getting a credit line large enough to cover first/last/moving/living expenses for a few months in this situation. Nyttend, the issue with Lebron James seems to have been with amateur athletic rules, not banking ones. 173.228.123.166 (talk) 04:10, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that's not what I was going for. My point is that in 2002, it was legal for a bank to lend enough money to buy a Hummer (more than would be necessary to rent a Capitol Hill apartment for a few months) with no security beyond a high schooler's potential earnings as an NBA star. The story was widely publicised; the bank likely wouldn't have gone through with such a transaction had it been illegal (because of the chance of publicity, if nothing else), and had it gotten in trouble with regulators, this would have been reported too. Nyttend (talk) 05:03, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Come to think of it, some types of student loans might fit the premise. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:24, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's an established niche market for "inheritance lending" (see https://www.wikihow.com/Get-an-Advance-on-Your-Inheritance etc.) though there doesn't seem to be much about it on Wikipedia. This appears to be similar... AnonMoos (talk) 09:45, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, a convenience link to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is in order. Nyttend (talk) 14:11, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone. Nyttend, aha, I see your point about Lebron James. Good observation. 173.228.123.166 (talk) 00:01, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Trade Between Ancient Egypt and the Shang Dynasty[edit]

Did it exist and what was the route used. déhanchements (talk) 22:32, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sea route from the Red Sea to Hormuz, Seleucid Empire and later Parthia, then Calicut, India and then Quanzhou, China.
Sleigh (talk) 00:59, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Seleucid empire came into existence about 300 B.C., while the Shang Dynasty fell about 1000 B.C., so there's a 700-year gap. The trick of sailing across the Indian Ocean directly from southwest Arabia to India wasn't yet known in 1000 B.C... AnonMoos (talk) 01:45, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Makut_Makaveli -- the Shang Dynasty was before 1000 B.C., while what William H. McNeill calls "the closure of the Eurasian ecumene" was more like 500 B.C. What that means is that most long distance inter-civilizational trade in 1000 B.C. was of small portable artistic objects, or limited quantities of precious materials, which were filtered through a long series of middlemen (on land, typically traded from tribe to neighboring tribe in a lengthy chain, while sea trade tended to proceed by short coast-hugging hops). AnonMoos (talk) 01:45, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copying an answer I previously posted on the OP's talk page because of the page throttling:

Per this article, there was no direct trade or contact between the two, but given the existence of trading networks which included the so-called Silk Road, it would not be surprising if some goods or items were passed from trader to trader (etc.) in either direction between the two. Note the passage in that article:

"Some remnants of what was probably Chinese silk dating from 1070 BCE have been found in Ancient Egypt."

Since the Shang dynasty spanned ca. 1600–1046 BCE, this is an actual example of Shang dynasty material finding its way to Ancient Egypt. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.218.14.42 (talk) 23:28, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

If you look at the Silk Road article, you'll see that it wasn't really developed as a regular semi-reliable trade route until the late centuries B.C., so again, there's a gap with respect to 1000 B.C... AnonMoos (talk) 00:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

True, but the OP did not mention the Seleucid dynasty, merely "Ancient Egypt", and "the Silk Road" did not spring fully-fledged into operation, but rather must have been a culminating development of earlier, less robustly established regional inter-trading, per Trade. The point I'm making is merely that while we know of no regular large-scale trade between Ancient Egypt and Shang-dynasty China that was recognised by the authorities of either region, some items and goods on a small scale could and did get transferred from one to the other through intermediate trading transactions. You said essentially the same thing in your first reply to the OP, so I don't think we're disagreeing on anything. (For clarity, my first reply preceded yours, but was made on the OP's Talk page because of the problems then ongoing on this page; I later copied it here to keep the discussion in one place.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.218.14.42 (talk) 18:34, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-1000BC Egypt and Shang-dynasty China didn't trade with each other in the sense of even being aware of the other's existence (much less having direct contacts). Rather, a few portable and valuable objects may have made their way from one to another through a long series of middlemen. Before 1000 BC, direct long-distance trade only occurred in certain limited areas, and probably did very little to speed up the migration of precious objects from Egypt to China or vice versa. Unfortunately, tossing off references to the Seleucid Empire or the Silk Road tends to obscure this distinction (unless there's a clear accompanying explanation). -- AnonMoos (talk) 18:47, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Before 1000 BC, direct long-distance trade only occurred in certain limited areas"

Trade networks were very significant in the Bronze Age: "Trade and industry played a major role in the development of the ancient Bronze Age civilizations. With artifacts of the Indus Valley Civilization being found in ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt, it is clear that these civilizations were not only in touch with each other but also trading with each other. Early long-distance trade was limited almost exclusively to luxury goods like spices, textiles and precious metals. Not only did this make cities with ample amounts of these products extremely rich but also led to an inter-mingling of cultures for the first time in history."

But then we have the Late Bronze Age collapse (12th century BC), with several players in this trade ceasing to exist or declining, trade routes being disrupted, and literacy itself mostly lost.: "Within a period of forty to fifty years at the end of the thirteenth and the beginning of the twelfth century almost every significant city in the eastern Mediterranean world was destroyed, many of them never to be occupied again." Dimadick (talk) 19:20, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Mesopotamians certainly traded directly with Dilmun, and during some periods Egyptians mounted expeditions to Punt, but I would tend to doubt whether there were many Mesopotamian or Egyptian traders in the Indus Valley, or Indus Valley traders in Egypt or Mesopotamia. Trade between Egypt and Mesopotamia isn't necessarily all that impressive, considering that during some periods the Egyptian empire in Canaan almost bordered on Mesopotamia. Before 1000 B.C., dependable long-distance direct trade routes were still rather sparsely distributed on the map, compared to what happened later, after "the closure of the Eurasian ecumene"... AnonMoos (talk) 01:00, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]