Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 January 28

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 28

Khobalus?

I need a little help with figuring out what the heck an author is talking about. I'm working on the kobold article, and one of the sources, Traditions, Superstitions, and Folk-lore, (Chiefly Lancashire and the North of England) by Charles Hardwick includes this note:

Roby says:--"The English Puck (the Lancashire Boggart), the Scotch Bogie, the French Goblin, the Gobelinus of the Middle Ages, and the German Kobold, are probably only varied names for the Grecian Khobalus,--whose sole delight consists in perplexing the human race, and evoking those harmless terrors that constantly hover round the minds of the timid. So, also, the German Spuck, and the Danish Spogel, correspond to the northern Spog; whilst the German Hudkin, and the Icelandic Puki, exactly answer to the character of the English Robin Goodfellow."

One problem is that Hardwick gives no indication of who Mr. Roby is, nor what source he is quoting from. Also problematic is that I can't find anything on this khobalus creature. Can anyone guess what the heck Roby is talking about?

Thanks for any help! — Dulcem (talk) 01:17, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Added note: I've found some sources that seem to indicate that cobolos is the Greek word for goblin, but nothing really good. For example, here and here. Any Greek speakers? — Dulcem (talk) 02:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

It refers to the book Traditions of Lancashire by John Roby (1793–1850), the first edition of which was issued in 1829.[1]  --Lambiam 02:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary the word "cobalt" comes from German kobold, while the entry for "goblin" has:

c.1327, from O.Fr. gobelin (12c., as Gobelinus, the name of a spirit haunting the region of Evreux), of uncertain origin, perhaps related to Ger. kobold (see cobalt), or from M.L. cabalus, from Gk. kobalos "rogue, knave," kobaloi "wicked spirits invoked by rogues." Another suggestion is that it is a dim. of the proper name Gobel.[2]

The spelling of Greek kobalos and the meaning impudent rogue, arrant knave is confirmed by Liddell & Scott.[3]  --Lambiam 02:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Works by or about John Roby in libraries (WorldCat catalog) John Roby wrote several books about English folklore. -Arch dude (talk) 02:45, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Excellent! I was aware of the knave etymology of kobold, but I hadn't seen it paired with the evil Greek spirit. I'll have to add something to the article. Thanks for the help on Roby and kobaloi. — Dulcem (talk) 03:45, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

7 day week

Why do most modern societies use a seven day week? --TreeSmiler (talk) 01:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Because they evolved from older societies that used a seven-day week, or were heavily influenced by such societies.  --Lambiam 01:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

It's an odd quirk of history that when the 7-day week started spreading through the Roman empire (ca. the 1st century A.D.), this was more due to an Egyptian astrological cycle than to direct Jewish or Christian influence... AnonMoos (talk) 12:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

An often overlooked theory about how the seven day week began in the ancient Fertile Crescent region (and indeed, it is not discussed in the wii articles above), is based on human geographic theories of settlement patterns that are discussed under the umbrella of Historical geography. What some scholars theorize is that the seven-day week evolved in the Fertile Crescent NOT by creating a day for each of the known planets of the time, but due to economic and geographic factors. This is based on the fact that in a geographic area that is not interrupted by mountain ranges, deserts, large bodies of water, or other restrictive factors, that humans will tend to settle in hexagonal patterns. This is what happened in many parts of the Fertile Crescent. The result is that every larger town or city would be surrounded by six other smaller towns that would be located roughly the same distance away from the main town in a hexagonal pattern. To make it easy for tax collectors and merchants to coordinate their efforts, each of the six peripheral towns would have a market day set up so that those who wished to buy and sell could travel to that town, and then on to the next one for the next day. On the seventh day the main central town would have its grand market day, and this would be where the religious temples and the ruler's residence was. To maximize the tithes and taxes coming in, it was set aside as a "sacred day". So this is the theory that says that it is from this seven day pattern that we get our seven day week. Some references that include this theory are:
* "Fundamentals of human geography", Milton Keynes : Open University Press, 1977
* "Human geography : concepts and applications", Briggs, Ken. London : Hodder and Stoughton, 1982
* "Studying cultural landscapes", Robertson, Iain & Richards, Penny. London : Arnold, 2003
* "Geography in relation to the social sciences", Bowman, Isaiah, 1878-1950 & Clark, Rose B. C. New York : Scribner's Sons, 1934
-- Saukkomies 20:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Court fools

In King Lear the fool becomes a confidante of the monarch. Is there any evidence of this happening in real life? T Jarvie (talk) 06:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• Based on the article Jester, there are some reasonably good historical examples. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The Jester article certainly mentions some notable fools, though I'm not really sure if it gives proper emphasis to their true importance in the royal court, and here I am thinking specifically of the English example. The most important of them had access to the monarch in his Privy Chamber, a privilege not readily granted. Of Will Somers, jester to Henry VIII, it was written that "He could have admittance to his majesty's chamber and his ear, when a great noble, nay, a privy counsellor could not be suffered to speak with him." Somers was even to appear in The Family of Henry VIII, painted in 1543. During the reign of Elizabeth I even the most influential people wishing to be admitted to the royal presence would fist approach Richard Tarlton, her leading fool, in order to prepare the way. Archibald Armstrong, court jester to James I, achieved such significance that he was even included in a small party to accompany Prince Charles on his secret mission to Spain in 1623 to negotiate a marriage with the Infanta Maria. Armstrong, the last of the great fools, eventually fell out of favour for his outspoken criticism of William Laud, even attacking him for his attempts to impose the English liturgy on Scotland. And as this was the very thing that eventually led to the ruin of Charles I it provides clear evidence that in folly there is often wisdom. Clio the Muse (talk) 23:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Wasnt it Richard TarlEton?

In several other cultures jesters were also considered the necessary bridge between the monarch and public opinion. The Polish jester (and national symbol) Stańczyk was in many ways unique in that he served as an advisor to several monarchs and was accepted as an authority on affairs by the intellectuals of the time. Relata refero (talk) 10:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you are quite right: the correct spelling is Tarleton. Clio the Muse (talk) 22:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I can't find it mentioned anywhere, but it seems to me that I read once that Henry II had at least one Jester in his court. Perhaps Clio knows more about this... -- Saukkomies 15:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Lifespan of book and album covers

When a book - say, a novel - is first published, typically in hardback, it has a particular jacket design. When it is republished in paperback a few years later, it invariably gets a new jacket design altogether. Then, if it's a successful title that goes through several pressings, it gets a new jacket design with every pressing. A novel like Nineteen Eighty-Four, for example, seems to get a new cover design every few years. Also, jacket designs often differ completely from country to country.

Contrast this with the approach taken to covers of popular music albums. Here, a record is given a cover design when it is first released and then, by and large, retains it forever. An old record may sometimes be given a new sleeve when it is reissued, but this is comparatively rare. Imagine if an iconic cover like Sgt Pepper or Dark Side of the Moon was discarded in favour of something new!

So, what is going on here? Why don't books retain the same cover design for their lifetime, like albums do? I imagine the reason is to keep titles "relevant" (yawn) as well as giving them a new lease of life commercially. But why, then, is the same logic not applied to albums? One might say that an album cover is more an integral part of the album than a book's cover is part of the book. But why should this be? --Richardrj ^{talk email} 07:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

In a lot (though not all) of cases, a paperback gets the picture of the main actor from a gripping scene when the book gets made into a movie or television series (I almost wept when I bought my daughter Encyclopedia Brown books last year and saw that it had been made into a TV show, and the cover model updated appropriately). In other cases, though, no idea. Faithfully, Deltopia (talk) 15:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

People who own a book will rarely buy a second copy in a new edition, but for owners of albums on vinyl records it has been fairly common to buy re-releases on CDs. They wanted the same thing they know and love, only migrated to new technology. The persistence of the jacket art has made the decision to abandon the cherished vinyl version psychologically less painful.  --Lambiam 20:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Off-topic: concerts vs shows

I started on a tangent, so I've added subheading --ColinFine (talk) 00:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Very interesting question, and I don't know the answer. I suspect that now the answer is 'because that's what the relevant industries do', but how it started I don't know. It reminds me of another conundrum I have been puzzling over for years: why are theatrical performances (including opera) almost always repeated, sometimes for years, while concerts are almost never repeated - even if a concert tours, it will hardly ever do more than one performance in a particular venue. --ColinFine (talk) 23:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The case of concerts is somewhat different, I would venture to say. (Are you talking about pop music or classical?) In theory, at least, pop concerts are supposed to be unrepeatable, one-off performances. The exception is when a group tours a particular album, such as Genesis' The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway or Pink Floyd's The Wall. In cases such as those, they are indeed repeated, often on more than one occasion and in the same venue. Recently, there has also been an alarming trend (well, I don't like it) of groups playing "classic albums" right the way through. Usually, though, the idea is that the choice of songs, and hence the overall performance, varies from night to night. And, of course, artists are writing and recording new songs all the time, and they tend to want to play those live as a priority. So, every time they tour, the set list will change somewhat. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 08:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking of classical: I don't know enough abvout pop concerts. A classical concert is usually a particular programme, and is almost never repeated unless it is touring. --ColinFine (talk) 00:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Why are psychedelic drugs illegal?

I read the article on psychedelics that Wikipedia has and it didn't go into much detail. With some psychedelic drugs having relatively high LD50's and little to no risk of long term damage or abuse, what was the justification used for classifying them as schedule I or class A etc. ? I was curious because it's just not something you hear about much, and i was wondering what the rationale behind the decision was.

24.88.103.234 (talk) 07:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)Timmy

I"m guessing you mean high LD50. —Tamfang (talk) 23:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

You're right my b. 24.88.103.234 (talk) 00:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)Timmy

You can find some arguments both ways in Arguments for and against drug prohibition.  --Lambiam 11:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Those are all possibilities. Is there any way of finding out exactly which arguments were used in the legal proceedings that prohibited these drugs? --Masamage ♫ 00:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah thank you this was more of what i was looking for. i've read the article on arguments for and against drug prohibition and i wanted a little more detail on the preceedings. 24.88.103.234 (talk) 00:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)Timmy

I thought that was what you meant. Unfortunately I have no idea where to find those kinds of records. :/ Surely someone does, though? --Masamage ♫ 17:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

In the UK, Hansard, the parliamentry record, shows what legislators said about the legislation they passed. AFAIK, when a bill is passe, there tends to be a publication which brings together all relevant info about the bill (e.g. select committee reports, debates &c) which would be the single best reference. I guess much the same pertains to the US. however much of this stuff is not well accessible on the net. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

In my opinion, the legality of tobacco and alcohol completely negates any argument that governments ban certain substances on the grounds of public health. Rather, most drugs are outlawed because, put simply, they reduce the productivity of those who take them. States rely on productive citizens for their revenue, so any drug that incapacitates its user for a significant part of the day is likely to be prohibited. Ninebucks (talk) 17:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I like your idea. I always thought it was a little hard to explain these decisions from a strict public health standpoint. Although a devil's advocate could bring up that DMT has one of the shortest durations of the psychedelic drugs and was still placed in schedule I.

TimmyDefense (talk) 05:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Timmy

United States Military - science & tech inventions

Say you have a US military officer who invents something. He invents it in his military lab on military property using military resources. For example a US Navy nurse invents a medical device, or a US Air Force officer who's an aeronautical engineer invents a tool of some sort. To what extent does he own his invention? Does he get the patent for it, or does the military? Does he stand to make money? Would the military compensate him somehow? Could he attach his name to the invention? I'm comparing this in my mind to university research, where a university owns many of the fruits of its researchers' labors. Is it similar in the military? Thanks! Clueless in Wikiland, IceCreamAntisocial (talk) 11:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Although I can't cite the exact rules and regulations, I think it would be much the same as you describe. The person who invented the widget, whatever it does, would get a pat on the back and maybe get their name on the patent somewhere but they wouldn't see any monetary gain from it. The patent would go to the military. Dismas|^(talk) 11:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Note that universities can have very different patent policies! Some universities do not seize patents in an attempt to encourage innovation among their staffs.

As for your question, I'm unsure of what happens when one is an actual officer in a military service, but I know that for contractors working with the military there are usually very specific patent clauses worked out ahead of time. For the most part the military actually has been relatively good about letting contractors keep the patents as long as the government gets a royalty-free license to use the technology -- the philosophy is that letting the contractor keep the patent in the commercial domain is part of the incentive for them to the work, but the government won't pay for it twice. But even that likely varies with the branch of service. And again, I don't know what it means for an officer, but I wouldn't be surprised if it had been raised a few times that letting officers keep some sort of fruit for their work would be an incentive for them to innovate.

I've only worked on the question historically (World War II era patent policies for R&D) and its very complicated and requires a lot of careful reading of patent clauses. I imagine it is more the case even today. I'd be worried about generalizing without really knowing the specifics. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 13:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Paul W. Airey, back in the Korean conflict, innovated a method of protecting radio parts from corrosion that, if he'd been a civilian, he could probably have patented and made scads of dough. Since he did that work for the military, though, he didn't make a dime off it per se. He did, however, earn a Legion of Merit, which is a remarkably high and prestigious award for an enlisted man, and led probably short-term to promotion, and certainly contributed to his ultimate promotion to the highest enlisted rank. It's not a patent or anything, but at least in Airey's case, it worked out to more than just a pat on the back in the long run. Faithfully, Deltopia (talk) 15:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

In the UK, the inventor retains the rights if the military do not declare the invention an issue of national security and therefore make it secret. This happened with Frank Whittle's jet engine - because at the time, the RAF saw no need for the engine, so he was able to hold onto the patent and use it to then privately develop a prototype. Laïka 09:39, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

First of the modern conqurers

i read a book recently that described the french king Louis XIV as the first of the modern conqurers in a line that goes through napoleon and hitler. Do you think that this is the right view? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.14.113 (talk) 11:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, why don't you start by telling us what the book was, and the arguments that persuaded you or that you disagreed with, and then your thoughts on the subject; then we will have something to go on. --ColinFine (talk) 23:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

No matter what the book it is always wise to beware of this kind of bogus genealogy, 217.43. Louis XIV was a man of his time, with limited political and strategic horizons; there is no evidence at all that he contemplated conquest on a Napoleonic scale. The Treaty of the Pyrenees, and his marriage to the Infanta Maria Teresa, inevitably involved him in the dynastic issues arising from the crumbling Spanish Empire. His campaigns on the Rhine and in the Netherlands were caused not by ambition but by fear of encirclement. His offensives, such as they were, were nothing when compared to the wars of his two most militant contemporaries-Charles XII of Sweden and Peter the Great of Russia. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Hullo Central

Could one of you please tell me why in Ford Madox Ford's novel, Parade's End, Christopher Tietjens' wife, Sylvia, calls her maid Hullo Central? I can't work it out! Unsuitable boy (talk) 11:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I haven't read the novel, but "Hello Central" was a stock phrase in early telephony, and is the name of Hank Morgan's child in Mark Twain's A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. Perhaps it is a reference to one of these. FiggyBee (talk) 11:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

It's there in the novel, Unsuitable boy-"I call my maid Hullo Central because she has a tinny voice like a telephone." I assume your confusion must arise from unfamiliarity with how the telephone system of the day operated? Anyway, all calls had to be routed through a central exchange, with operators responding in the fashion described by Sylvia. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes. See Telephone operator. --Anon, 03:23 UTC, January 30, 2008.

strange land formation in northern quebec?

what is this circular formation at N 51° 23', W 68° 43' ? --206.248.172.247 (talk) 12:08, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Manicouagan Reservoir. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 12:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Sneaker Pimps

I have virtually no experience with or knowledge of the trip-hop genre, but I stumbled upon Becoming X, and -really- enjoyed it. The female singer's vocals and the nearly hypnotic music are a combination I find really relaxing. Apparently, immediately after putting out that album, the group fired that singer, Kelli Dayton, in favor of a male, so I am not going to rush out and buy a bunch of later Sneaker Pimps albums. I want to find more music that sounds like this, though -- the same, only different! Any suggestions? Faithfully, Deltopia (talk) 15:17, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't know the group myself, but here are a few helpful pointers for similar artists:

1. Go to this website and type the group's name into the box. You get a screenful of other artists floating prettily around the screen. The closer they are to the centre, apparently, the greater the probability they will be similar to the group you entered.
2. Go to this website and have a look at the list of similar artists. In general Last FM is very good for this kind of thing; I recommend it highly as a music/social networking site.
3. Go to the album's page on Amazon, see what people who were interested in it were also interested in, follow the links.

From a quick look, it sounds like you would be interested in Massive Attack and Portishead, so have a listen to them first off. Happy listening. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 16:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

You might like the early Morcheeba albums, specifically Who Can You Trust? and Big Calm. Their singer on those albums, Skye Edwards has a beautifully hypnotic voice. Rockpocket 08:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe Telepopmusik. kawaputra^torque 18:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Desteni?

Ok. Here's the deal. There is a website, www.desteni-universe.co.za, that details what i believe to be a religion. The FAQ has most of the details. Can anyone tell me what religion this is? here's the link: http://desteni.co.za/Faq.htm Bugsym5 (talk) 15:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

This is no religion it is actually a brainwashing cult. They use various techniques in which the followers are slowly being turned into BIOLOGICAL ROBOTS (you will see this from their robotically programmed responses). They do this under the guise of equality and oneness, But if one questions them they surround you like a pack of wolves and give you abuse and delete comments that show them for what they really are. This shows that they do NOT believe in true equality and have a sinister agenda at the core.

Not even for WP will I read densely-packed, tiny, white script on a dark background, and pages and pages of it at that. As far as I can make out fron the opening paragraph, this has something, however tenuous, to do with a Sumerian religion Annunaki or Ellis's fictional world using the same deities. If you start with the WP article noted, you can follow the tracks from there and make up your own mind. Bielle (talk) 18:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

It also appears to have links to Theosophy and a number of other New Age style beliefs. Steewi (talk) 01:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The Roman Empire

Where might I find Edward Gibbons book "The History of the rise and fall of the Roman Empire"?75.66.33.128 (talk) 15:53, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

If you go to The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire#Editions and click on the ISBN of one of the editions, this will take you to a page where you can search libraries, databases and online booksellers for that particular edition. David Šenek (talk) 16:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

You can also find it online in various places, some of which are listed at The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire#External links. Algebraist 16:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The full text is online here. I'm old-fashioned enough to have a good set of the six volumes, and if you want to read Gibbon with pleasure I advise you to find hard copies. I've noticed that in the UK the Folio Society's set of Gibbon is selling on ebay for a fraction of its original price. Xn4 04:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

cole scego

i am looking for more information on designer cole scego 64.15.93.49 (talk) 16:08, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Cole Scego has his own website at [4] and I found one blog interview about him on Google[5]. The rest of the Google hits appeared to be all MySpace and other blogs. Bielle (talk) 18:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

A high resolution picture of a Lenin painting

Hi, I've searched high and low for a higher resolution of this: http://www.johndclare.net/images/Lenin.JPG

Does anyone know of a source that has a better resolution? Preferably something in the width of 1,000 pixels or so? I'd be most thankful. 81.93.102.185 (talk) 16:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

This is a painting by V. A Serov, Lenin addresses the Second All-Russia Congress of Soviets (1955), which you also find on this (fuzzy) image of a Soviet stamp. (This cannot be the painter Valentin Alexandrovich Serov, who died in 1911). While I also could not find a better image, perhaps this information may help your search.  --Lambiam 21:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Vladimir Aleksandrovich Serov (1910-1968), other works are Lenin Declares Soviet Power (1948), On Foot To V. I. Lenin (1951), and The Winter Palace is Taken (1954). Lenin Declares... was once featured on commons, but later deleted as a copyvio.—eric 21:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

A very powerful and fine piece, this is. Thanks for the help so far. Unfortunately I've yet to find anything that satisfied my need for a picture with a higher resolution. 81.93.102.185 (talk) 22:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Nenarokov, A. P. (1987). An Illustrated History of the Great October Socialist Revolution 1917, Month by Month. Moscow: Progress. OCLC 17244668, tho this might be a cropped version.—eric 22:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Constantine and Christianity

What were the precise reasons for the Emperor Constantine's conversion to Christianity?86.148.38.101 (talk) 17:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The only person, who could tell you the precise reasons, is dead for about 1700 years. We don't even know the exact date of his conversion to Christianity. The only thing, we know for sure is the religion of his mother Helena. She was a believing Christian. We can expect her to have influenced her son, but please be aware that these only can be speculations. --Thw1309 (talk) 18:19, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The article on Constantine I and Christianity addresses the uncertainty (or "scholarly controversy") around his conversion too. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

It was politics, dear boy, politics! Yes, I simplify, but in simplicity there is always a hard nugget of truth.

Victory at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge was not sufficient in itself; the empire had to be pacified, and one way of achieving this was to end the persecution of the increasingly important Christian community. But the Edict of Milan only extended recognition to Christianity as one of the empire's many cults, with Christ no more significant than Apollo, to whom the Emperor had already pledged his special allegiance. From a purely Christian perspective the Milan decree was just as intolerable, if not more so, than the persecutions of Diocletian.

While Constantine hoped to harness the power of the Christian God, it seems certain, his background notwithstanding, that he had an imperfect understanding of the true nature of the religion. It was his continuing need for political support that served to focus his thinking, to appreciate the power that could be conferred by a church, infinitely better organised than its pagan competitors. It was this unified and organised church that he saw as an essential base to his power, and made him all the more determined to maintain that unity after his victory over Licinius in 324. At the First Council of Nicaea, summoned to address the dangerously disruptive Arian heresy, Constantine appeared as the dominant influence, more powerful than any bishop, beginning a long tradition of Caesaropapism.

Now in the latter part of his reign, Constantine gave further signs of the special significance that Christianity had achieved in his political scheme of things by lavish patronage, in sharp contrast to his neglect of the pagan cults. But it is always well to remember that to the very end, even in the great city of Constantinople, the supreme figure, even the supreme deity, was not Christ but Constantine, which makes him not that much different to his imperial predecessors, all the way back to Augustus. Baptism only came at the very end for an Emperor who was always more mindful of earthly than heavenly power. Clio the Muse (talk) 01:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Musicals: "The Red Mill" vs. "Moulin Rouge!"

Given the similarity of titles (red mill being English for moulin rouge), and that their origins are contemporary, is it known whether Victor Herbert's 1906 musical "The Red Mill" was in any way inspired by the Paris cabaret "Moulin Rouge", built in 1899? See Wiki entries: "The Red Mill" stage musical, "Moulin Rouge!" movie musical.Victorcamp (talk) 20:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)Victor Campbell

Looking at the articles, there seem to be no similarities. Herbert's musical seems to have been inspired by an actual red mill built outside the Knickerbocker Theatre, not by the Paris cabaret. Luhrmann's movie was partly based on the operas La boheme (Puccini) and La Traviata (Verdi). The only well-known movie based on the Paris cabaret Moulin Rouge was Moulin Rouge (1952 - no exclamation mark), which told the story of Toulouse-Lautrec. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I came away from reading The Red Mill with the understanding that the windmill was built outside the theater to advertise the show, but in re-reading the article I see that it's not clearly stated. One might assume that Herbert was aware of the Parisian cabaret, but there really does not seem to be anything in the plot to support a connection. --LarryMac | Talk 21:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Defection

Can the term "defection" be applied to taking citizenship in a country that is an ally of one's original country? Usually you hear the term when someone defects to an enemy, but if, say, a U.S. citizen moves to the UK and takes British citizenship, could he be said to have defected to the UK? —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 22:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

"Defection" would suggest that the government of the country you're defecting from wouldn't approve. In this case, I wouldn't say it applies, as the US is on friendly terms with the UK and, even after taking British citizenship, you would still be able to exercise your US citizenship. FiggyBee (talk) 22:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Though the CIA might take a dim view if one of its employees took a job with its British counterpart. —Tamfang (talk) 23:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The word defection originally carried no implication of joining another side, merely of quitting the side you're on. A defector was the same as a deserter. Of course, since the Cold War, a defector is usually somebody being given sanctuary by a government hostile to his own. So using it not only implies the enmity of the side you're leaving, but also suggests a state of war-like hostility between the side you're leaving and the side you're joining. If the U.S. doesn't mind your leaving (or doesn't care), and the country of your choice enjoys a "special relationship" with the U.S., then you aren't a defector in either sense. If an ordinary American (i.e. not wanted by any federal agencies) who had acquired UK citizenship were to describe himself as a defector, it would probably be taken as political hyperbole or a joke. Lantzy ^talk 23:38, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I just thought of a possible exception. A number of American servicemen have sought refuge in Canada rather than return to Iraq for a second tour of duty. Are they defectors? Strictly, yes. But are they defectors in the full-blown Cold War sense? I would say not, because although Canada turns a blind eye to them, or even grants them limited assistance, the Canadian government remains on good terms with the U.S. To defect, in the sense the word has acquired since the Cold War, requires a conflict in which there are "sides" to be taken. If two countries are on the same side, generally speaking, then transferring one's citizenship from one to the other does not constitute a defection, even if the transfer is messy and legally dubious. You would have to go somewhere like Iran to really become a defector in most people's eyes. Lantzy ^talk 23:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for your answers. I was wondering because I'm a U.S. citizen but contemplating taking German citizenship since I've lived in Germany for 11 years and will probably spend the rest of my life here. Under German law, I have to renounce my U.S. citizenship if I want to do that; I can't be a dual citizen. So I'm looking for a word to describe myself. I used to use "expatriate", but that term to me implies someone who will go back to their native country after a few years and bore everyone else with interminable stories beginning "When I was in Germany..." (or whatever country they lived in). Right now I tend to think of myself as an "immigrant" with its romantic implications of huddled masses yearning to breathe free, and despite the oddity of thinking of the United States as the "old country". But I'd hate to be thought of as a "defector". Since I'm neither a soldier nor a spy, though, I guess the term couldn't be accurately used to describe me. —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 06:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sure, Angr, we believe you. I mean, a spy would hardly be admitting to it in open forum, would they. But when nobody even alleged you were one, your unnecessary denial looks pretty damn suss to me.  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 08:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Like Bismarck, I tell the truth so my enemies will think I'm lying. —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 20:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I guess "immigrant" is the most accurate and uncomplicated term, but 'émigré' is more romantic. Or perhaps 'pilgrim'. Lantzy ^talk 21:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Your connotation for expatriate is one I'd not really heard before. Even Philip Nolan was an expatriate. --LarryMac | Talk 21:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Émigré is too political, and pilgrim too religious. Also, "pilgrim" doesn't suggest moving someplace else permanently, despite the fact that the Pilgrims did so. Our own article on Expatriates says, "A nickname in the UK for former expatriates who have returned to Britain is the 'When I's, or 'When we's, as they are accused of starting conversations by saying 'When I was in Rhodesia' or 'When we were in Singapore'." —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 21:26, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps 'pioneer' is more to your liking. Lantzy ^talk 22:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe there is no good word. People in your situation often say they "moved to" another country, but they don't call themselves "movers". Also, once you've become a German citizen, then you'll be a German, and how you came by that status should be irrelevant for most purposes. I know that, in some ways, migrants to a new country think of themselves, and are thought of by others, as separate from natives to that country despite sharing a common loyalty and citizenship. That's a social phenomenon. But legally they should have the same status; there should be no first-class and second-class citizens. And if the laws do disadvantage arrivees from other countries who are now fully-fledged citizens, compared to native-born citizens, I'd think twice about taking up citizenship. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Of course, there's no legal difference between a native and naturalized German citizen; what I'm casting around for is a word that describes the social aspects of it. And I already consider myself an immigrant, since "immigrant" does not necessary imply being a citizen of the destination country. And if I do take citizenship, I suppose I will be an "American-German" (as opposed to a German-American, which I am not). —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 23:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, there's "naturalized German", of course. Or "American-born German". What is the problem with "American-German"? Lantzy ^talk 23:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Mostly that the use of such hyphenates as descriptors of people's origins is fairly uncommon in Europe. At least in my experience. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 18:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Oil Exploitation

What are some ways governments can regulate or stop oil exploitation?

-Juanita

Nationalization, if diplomacy isn't sufficient. Conceivably war. I assume you mean foreign exploitation. Lantzy ^talk 23:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The United Kingdom operates a system of licensing and taxation on North Sea oil exploration and extraction. DuncanHill (talk) 23:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Anyone else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.87.200.184 (talk) 01:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Environmental regulation, either at the national or local level. Exploiting an oil resource requires a tremendous amount of equipment, and even the best efforts result in some air, water, or soil pollution. Also, regulations against public nuisances (like excess noise or light) would cause trouble for these operations, which are usually loud and only operate efficiently if they run around the clock. --M@rēino 16:26, 29 January 2008 (UTC)