Humanities desk
< August 11	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 13 >

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.

August 12

Post-annexation maps of the Ukraine

I'm seeking and failing to find maps of the Ukraine after the Russian annexation of the Crimea, i.e. they were first produced after the incident or they're marked as having been updated after the incident. I don't care about the licensing status: I'm trying to complete an article about maps of Ukraine and want to include a little bit about how different mapmakers have treated the incident. Nyttend (talk) 00:16, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also have nothing about military maps of the country, especially from the world wars, and those would particularly be helpful. Nyttend (talk) 00:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Does This get you started? From there I found this map which may be interesting for your cause. --Jayron32 00:36, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I meant something different: I'm looking for WP:RS on the subject, because I don't have any solid sources talking about post-incident maps, so the article stops with this pre-annexation source. Nyttend (talk) 00:50, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How's the New York Times for you? --Jayron32 01:24, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have a Soviet map of Ukraine from 1940 with a "zone of German state interests" labelled beyond the Molotov-Ribbentropp line, interested?212.234.218.49 (talk) 08:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

google maps russia version shows a national border between Ukraine and Crimea.184.147.144.166 (talk) 10:38, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Twain at the House of Commons

File:Mark Twain at the House of Commons by Sir (John) Benjamin Stone (2).jpg

Could someone help me with identification in this photograph? I have alrady figured out some of them:

All help will be appreciated.--The Theosophist (talk) 14:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.

The NPG lists:

John Samuel Phene (1824-1912), Scholar, antiquarian and architect
(Montague Horatio) Mostyn Turtle Pigott (1865-1927), Author and journalist; founder and first editor of the 'Isis'; barrister
Mr Walter, of 'The Times'

Does anybody know who is who?--The Theosophist (talk) 14:28, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Walter of The Times would be Arthur Fraser Walter. Not yet found clear pic of him (there were 4 generations of Walters of The Times before it became a company). DuncanHill (talk) 14:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's a picture of Dr Phene here. Not very clear but if I had to I'd put my money on #1 in your picture. DuncanHill (talk) 14:36, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Scala Archives attempts to identify the men from left to right here.--Cam (talk) 14:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's a caricature of Mostyn Pigott here - looks like your #3. DuncanHill (talk) 15:50, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

western wall

who built the top layers of the Western Wall? And when, and why? There is a legend about this relating to Sir Moses Montefiore. Where did it originate? Naytz (talk) 16:01, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've not heard that legend. He did renovate Rachel's Tomb - perhaps some confusion over that has occurred? DuncanHill (talk) 16:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but who did built the top layers of the Western Wall? And when, and why? The legend about this relating to Sir Moses Montefiore state that he did this to pervent Arabs from throwing rocks at Jewish worshippers, and is quite wide spread. (See for example the memorial Article for Montefiore on Israel National News.) I have seen in in his writings he did "erect an awning for the 'wailing place' near the western wall of the Temple, so as to afford shelter and protection from rain and heat to pious persons visiting this sacred spot" Naytz (talk) 16:01, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on the Western Wall used to say that "The next fourteen layers are from the Ottoman period and their addition is (most likely mistakenly) attributed to Sir Moses Montefiore who in 1866 arranged that further layers be added “for shade and protection from the rain for all who come to pray by the holy remnant of our Temple”. The top three layers were placed by the Mufti of Jerusalem before 1967." The source listed might have more info. Gabbe (talk) 07:30, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The pelting thing is also mentioned in Simon Sebag Montefiore's book Jerusalem: The Biography. It says (p. 357) that "In March 1866, Montefiore, now a widower of eighty-one, arrived on his sixth visit and could not believe the changes. Finding that the Jews at the Western Wall were exposed not only to the rain but to occasional pelting from the Temple Mount above, he received permission to set up an awning there". Gabbe (talk) 07:39, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In what religion(s) or cultural system(s) is charging interest for a loan illegal?

How many religions or cultural systems disapprove of charging interest for a loan? Do the religious adherents ever own banks or credit card companies? 65.24.105.132 (talk) 17:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic banking is a good example to start with. Mingmingla (talk) 18:17, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Usury is also a relevant read. --Jayron32 19:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jehovah's Witnesses have published an article about interest at http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002183.

—Wavelength (talk) 19:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I may be wrong but I seem to remember reading somewhere that Jewish people are allowed to lend money with interest, but not to each other, see Loans and interest in Judaism --Andrew 00:28, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Jewish law? Interest between Jews is forbidden while between Jews and non-Jews it is permitted; the relevant verse refers to not lending to one's "brother" with interest (I am glossing over some complications here). Jews can lend to other Jews with interest with the aid of a legal loophole called a Heter iska, in which a loan is viewed as an investment and the interest as dividends. This loophole, however, requires that a document be drawn up, and is not valid for all sorts of loans, if I recall correctly.
  These concepts are all explained reasonably well at the article you mentioned. (I've taken the liberty of fixing the link.) הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 03:35, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed; one famous Jew refers, by way of parable, with apparent approbation to the practice: 'Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.' (Matthew 25, 27). 83.24.179.86 (talk) 19:43, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note that for most of history, Christianity forbade lending money for interest. This is why Jews, who were allowed to lend money to Christians for interest, became prominent in banking. StuRat (talk) 23:39, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

State of Israel

Where the Jewish people really stateless for around 2,500 years? --112.198.90.43 (talk) 18:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On the balance, yes, they really were. At times, some countries did grant Jewish people full citizenship rights (or the equivalent), for example see this article which discusses treatment of Jewish people in Muslim Iberia before the Reconquista. Also see Al-Andalus#Non-Muslims_under_the_Caliphate. However, for most of history, Jewish people were sporadically tolerated, but rarely accepted as full members of the society they lived in, and were subject to frequent persecutions, exiles, massacres, and pogroms. Other than the notable exception of Al-Andalus, I can't think of any substantial period of time, in any place, where Jewish people were afford equal citizenship status to other peoples. --Jayron32 19:31, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There was also the Khazar Khaganate, which was ruled by Turkic peoples who had converted to Judaism, but that is not usually considered a "Jewish state", strictly speaking. --Adam Bishop (talk) 19:36, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More like 2,000 years than 2,500 years, since the Jewish Hasmonean dynasty remained independent until just over 2,000 years before the founding of the State of Israel, and the Herodian dynasty ruled over what could be considered a Jewish state — though the state was not really independent of Rome — up to a bit less than 2,000 years before Israel's founding.

The Himyarite Kingdom was also dominated by Jewish people (mostly converts to Judaism) for part of its history.

After the Siege of Jerusalem (63 BC) and the effective conquest of the Jewish homeland by Rome, a series of Jewish rebellions led the Romans to massacre or enslave and uproot much of the Jewish population and to favor members of other ethnic and religious groups in what had been the Jewish homeland. Thereafter, Jews, with the rare exceptions mentioned above, never formed a majority or the dominant group in any society until they colonized Palestine in the early 20th century. Marco polo (talk) 20:13, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's worth noting that the Herodians weren't culturally Jewish, they were Edomites. The distinction probably didn't make much difference to the Romans, but native Judeans saw the Herodians as foreigners who had converted to the Jewish faith, and not as of their own culture. --Jayron32 03:35, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jayron, isn't your last sentence a little too sweeping, or have I misconstrued its meaning? Were there not many Jewish American citizens between 1776 and 1948? And in other democratic countries? Australia's first native-born governor-general (1931-36), Sir Isaac Isaacs, was a Jew; he had previously been a Justice of the High Court (1906-30) and Chief Justice (1930-31). This all happened well before the state of Israel came into existence. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:10, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And Moses Montefiore was Sheriff of the City of London in 1836. Hardly a second-class citizen. DuncanHill (talk) 22:52, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The plural of anecdotes is not data, and over the course of a few thousand years, that an occasional Jewish person found themselves in positions of power, or that we can name a single society once in a while, for a few decades, where Jews weren't treated with revile and hatred doesn't affect the balance of history. Yes, we can find situation, especially in the last 200 years, in a few countries around the world, where Jewish people didn't have it so bad. But on the balance, most societies (even the U.S and U.K. and other Anglosphere nations) don't have a long history of tolerance and acceptance of Jewish people. Emancipation of the Jews in the United Kingdom occurred in the 1830s, so it has really only been less than 2 centuries. So less 10% of their history from the Diaspora to the founding of Israel, and only in a few societies we could count on our hands, I would say that doesn't fully capture the preponderance of the Jewish experience for most of their history. --Jayron32 02:43, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jews in the UK were in a similar position to Roman Catholics before emancipation. And of course a much better position than African Americans in the USA before emancipation - or indeed most Africans before decolonisation. It is invidious to select facts in a way that singles out a single religion or ethnicity as "special" or "unique" - whether as victims or as oppressors. DuncanHill (talk) 04:11, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. But their history is shocking enough without making it seem that 1948 was the first time any Jew ever, anywhere, was considered a human being worthy of citizenship.

I wonder whether the OP meant this, or whether they're talking about their own sovereign homeland, Israel. If that, then yes, the Jewish people as a whole were stateless for around 2,500 years. They had to be content with citizenship of whatever country they were living in, assuming it was afforded them, which was often not the case. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 03:20, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough as well. Perhaps I spoke with a bit of hyperbole. But whether you consider it from a "Did the Jewish people have their own state" or from the perspective of "Did some Jewish people ever belong to any state as full citizens", the former is a resounding "no" and the latter is a "very rarely". --Jayron32 03:24, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While I was looking into the distinction between Statelessness and Stateless nation, the discussion headed in that direction. There was no Jewish state of any significance from 70 CE to 1948. And full citizenship was rare until the United States was founded, and the revolutionary/Napoleanic changes in Europe. But speaking as a San Francisco area Jew, the Jews were completely free and powerful, and thrived here for 100 years before Israel's independence. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:36, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the United States, absolutely correct. But most Jews didn't live under such liberal regimes. Prior to the middle 20th century, most Jews lived in central and eastern Europe, and frequently were not afforded much rights or political power at all. --Jayron32 16:51, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There was the Kingdom of Semien of the Beta Israel which existed till 1627.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:00, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to the question, no the Jews were not stateless, and presumably wandering across Central Europe like Moses in the wilderness, for some 2,500 years. Simply stating the proposition in this way is to invite the answer that Zionism was a reasonable response to this state of affairs. There is an interesting recent article here which discusses, inter alia the state of Jews in Britain from Cromwell onwards; between the period of their expulsion (by Edward I) and reintroduction most seem to have settled in Poland; see History of the Jews in Poland.

There may be good arguments to made in favour of Zionism, but deliberately exaggerating claims of discrimination in order to promote the argument, as this statement does, is simply absurd. The side effect, incidentally, is to damn European countries which had a resident Jewish population, such as Poland, as somehow institutionally anti-Semitic which is grossly unfair and unhistorical. 178.42.159.166 (talk) 16:06, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A villein against a serf

Is there a major difference between a villein and a serf? Did a villein have more social mobility than a serf? Are they interchangeable? Seattle (talk) 19:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They are effectively the same, they just come from different words (villanus, a worker on a Roman villa, a servus, a servant/slave of any sort). There was never any really strict rules to feudalism, and it differed depending on the time and place (and some argue that it never existed at all!), so there is no precise definition of terms related to what we think of as feudalism that would cover the entire Middle Ages. Some places sometimes called them villeins, other places sometimes called them serfs, other places had other names, but they are the same thing. --Adam Bishop (talk) 19:40, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To quote Domesday Book and Beyond by Maitland (p.26): "In the thirteenth century servus [serf] and vilanus [vilein] are, at least among lawyers, equivalent words. [...] It is far otherwise in the Domesday Book." It has two chapters covering the distinction between them. Gabbe (talk) 07:05, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Benoni Richmond Davison

So I have differing sources call a man by the name of Benoni Richmond Davison Superintendent of the Insane Asylum and Superintendent of the American Marine Hospital at Honolulu. Were both the Hawaiian Insane Asylum and the American Marine Hospital the same place or close together during the 1860s and 1870s?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:37, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A source here says that the insane asylum was located at Palama, Kalihi, and that its "incoming director, Mr. Davison, 'already had considerable experience in like cases at the American Hospital.'" So it looks like they were separate institutions and that Davison worked at the American Hospital before he worked at the asylum.--Cam (talk) 18:41, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A. B. Hayley

Can anybody help me find out who this man named A. B. Hayley was? When he was born and when he died and where he was originally from? The only I know is he was King Kalakaua's military staff as a major and all I can find so far is just his name in a list of other people's names. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently he was Andrew Burrell Hayley, formerly of the 11th Hussars. Some garbled information about him here (under "Gaiety Girl's Life").--Cam (talk) 22:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]