Humanities desk
< June 4	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 6 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 5[edit]

Shi'a Muslim-majority areas in northern India?[edit]

Why exactly does this map show Shi'a Muslim-majority areas in northern India? :

https://www.amazon.com/Historic-Map-Georges-Lafosse-Vintage/dp/B086SJWCHB

What are these areas and who exactly are the Shi'a Muslims who live there in such huge numbers? 68.228.73.154 (talk) 04:51, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure that map may be interpreted as Shi'a Muslims forming a majority there. Any coloured dots shown represent a variety of Islam; other religions are not shown at all. The area seems to be mainly Uttar Pradesh. We have an article on Shi'a Islam in the Indian subcontinent, which states that the capital of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, is considered the centre of India's Shi'ite Muslim community. See also Chota Imambara and Azadari in Lucknow. --Lambiam 09:43, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Islam in Uttar Pradesh doesn't help much on this question. Alansplodge (talk) 10:39, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sufism in India mentions Madariyya, "a Sufi order (tariqa) popular in North India, especially in Uttar Pradesh.." Perhaps this also counts as a "variety of Islam"? Alansplodge (talk) 11:03, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This order is, unlike most Sufi orders, "non-denominational", not requiring its followers to profess themselves adherents of either the Sunni or the Shi'a doctrines. I expect they would not wish to be classified as a "variety" of Islam. --Lambiam 14:53, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

bandanas in the workplace[edit]

When I was a child, I've seen young women and girls wearing bandanas on their heads while doing chores or their jobs. Those types of workers also did the same thing in Norma Rae [1]. How should I describe the way the bandanas are worn?2603:7000:8106:C149:5D87:D175:7D55:B870 (talk) 13:12, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Normally described as a headscarf, the usage you describe is in Headscarf#Use while working. I also found a video; How to Tie a 1940s Headscarf. During World War II, women working in factories wore them to stop their hair getting dirty and to prevent long hair getting caught in machinery. Rosie the Riveter is a famous example. Alansplodge (talk) 13:51, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat related, the actress Veronica Lake famously had to change her signature hairstyle during WW2 at government request, to prevent women factory workers from imitating it... AnonMoos (talk) 18:32, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~The iconic World War II poster of Rosie the Riveter,~~ "We Can Do It!"~~, sports this "fashion accessory".~~ Clarityfiend (talk) 20:47, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, Alansplodge beat me to it, but at least I can provide a link to the poster. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:50, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not just in the USA, see Ruby Loftus Screwing a Breech-ring (not quite such a snappy title). I also found this Australian article. Alansplodge (talk) 20:54, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It may not be snappy, but it's raised many a smile over the years. DuncanHill (talk) 21:27, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm referring to the 1970s. (Norma Rae, which was released in 1979, showed women wearing bandanas differently.)2603:7000:8106:C149:5D87:D175:7D55:B870 (talk) 21:03, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen the film, but I expect there was the same rationale as their parents' generation, just a different style. Alansplodge (talk) 21:11, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See also Do-rag. Matt Deres (talk) 16:59, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Walter M. Miller's Darfsteller[edit]

Our SF group is, on alternate months, reading either a novel or a short story. This Friday, we discussed The Darfsteller by Walter M. Miller Jr. (of A Canticle for Leibowitz fame). We noticed, among other things, an apparent break in tone, style and message in the last about two pages. Up to then, it was a melancholic story of an out-of-work actor grasping at straws to save "the theater". But then it ends with an optimistic "let go of the old, humans are the creative species, embrace the new", very much in the same vein as Heinlein's "specialisation is for insects". Does anybody know if this epilogue has always been part of the story? The Darfsteller was first published in 1955 by Campbell in Astounding Stories, and we suspect that the editor insisted on this final twist (which is very much in line with Campbell's philosophy, but not, as far as I can tell, Miller's). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 19:06, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If the ending was changed at Campbell's behest, and the first published version was that in Astounding, is it not a certainty that the epilogue was already part of that version? The only way we might find out then whether it was changed is from a preserved version of the initially submitted typescript. Campbell's influence was so huge that, reportedly, aspiring authors already moulded their stories even before submission, conforming their endings to the notion of the indomitable spirit of man prevailing against all odds. --Lambiam 10:33, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed. The question is if that segment was in Miller's original draft. It certainly is in the original Astounding copy (which can be found online with a bit of Google-Fu). And it also is in the Dark Benedictions collection of Miller's short stories. In 1955, Miller was already fairly established as a writer (it's the year the First Canticle came out, too). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 11:15, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wilhelm F.R?[edit]

Further to the discussion above about Wilhelm II's desk, The Kaiser’s Order for German Mobilization (August 1, 1914) shows his signature as (if I'm reading this correctly) "Wilhem F.R.". I can't think what "F.R." might stand for, can anyone enlighten me? Alansplodge (talk) 21:07, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The signature is definitely "Wilhelm". 89.243.13.32 (talk) 21:10, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Führer des Reiches? 89.243.13.32 (talk) 21:14, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No. Führer is a different megalomaniac and a different world war. The signature shown at Wilhelm II, German Emperor has the "R", which in this context almost certainly stands for "Rex" (King). I don't know if the "F" is an "F" or maybe a "7". If it's an "F", it could stand for "Friedericus" or "Friederich", his actual first name. But I think Duncan (below) has it. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 21:22, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's an F, looks more like a J or perhaps an I, in Fraktur. DuncanHill (talk) 21:20, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In classical Fraktur fonts there is no distinction between the I and J majuscules.^[2] In later versions, a distinction has been created by making the I less tall. --Lambiam 10:09, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think it's an I. IR = Imperator Rex. Emperor (of Germany) and King (of Prussia). DuncanHill (talk) 21:21, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Imperator Rex (like "Victoria R I")? 89.243.13.32 (talk) 21:24, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See here. DuncanHill (talk) 21:25, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, that must be it - those Continental types and their dodgy handwriting! (I thought intitially it was a number 7, but settled on a cursive F).

Interestingly, I had a go at following-up the plausible suggestion of User:89.243 and found:

Majestät unser allergnädigster Kaiser Wilhelm II, unser leuchtendes Vorbild und Führer des Reiches, lebe hoch, hoch, hoch! [3]

Many thanks one and all. Alansplodge (talk) 21:38, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

"Wilhelm II. entfloh dem Regierungsalltag mit einer solchen Inbrunst, dass die Deutschen das "I.R." in dessen kaiserlicher Signatur (Imperator Rex) heimlich zu "immer reisebereit" verballhornten" "Wilhelm II escaped the everyday life of the government with such fervour that the Germans secretly distorted the "I.R." in his imperial signature (Emperor Rex) to "always ready to travel"‎" DuncanHill (talk) 21:42, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Having had more of a look, I think Kurrent is more likely than Fraktur. DuncanHill (talk) 22:11, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Kurrent

Makes sense. A modernised cursive script called Sütterlin was introduced into German schools in 1915. I can't read that either. My generation in 1960s Britain learned Marion Richardson's "Linked Script" (with a dip pen), which has minimal ligatures and no flourishes of any kind. Alansplodge (talk) 10:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have the plot, but need author and title[edit]

I read a story about 50 years ago that has me stumped. I remember the plot, in which a girl has a nightmare about a man in an old-fashioned green jacket who says he will come for her when she is older. She has the same dream in college. Nothing happens. She marries and has the same dream in which she is told, ‘I will come for you soon.’ She tells her husband, and he says she is stressed and should go on a business trip with him for a change of scenery. They go to Ireland (I think) and stay in an old manor house. The husband goes into a nearby city for a meeting, his wife goes to explore to house. She finds an old portrait with a picture of the man in her dream, a baron who died a century before. When the husband returns, he learns there has been a terrible storm that washed away part of a nearby hillside cemetery. There is an empty grave (it is the long-deceased baron). The wife is nowhere to be found. Now you know why this plot has haunted me!JanefromBayside (talk) 22:03, 5 June 2021 (UTC) Jane[reply]

@JanefromBayside: It's not a match in absolutely every particular, but this is extremely close to "The Face" by E. F. Benson. If that's not the story you're thinking of, it must be a near plagiarism. Deor (talk) 21:14, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've quickly skimmed the story, and it does seem to be the one you've been looking for. He actually says "I shall soon come for you now." There's no Ireland, but she does see his portrait in a gallery. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:15, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See SPOOK STORIES By E · F BENSON Alansplodge (talk) 10:51, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Albert The Bear[edit]

Hello, I would like to revise/correct a part of the Wikipedia Albert The Bear article.

I have editor's rights, however the entry, in "edit," shows only the first part, basically his dates etc.

My question is, how do I gain access to the actual body of the entry?

For context, a summary of the edit:

Albert The Bear and was a Saxon Prince in the 12th century.

He was granted the Duchy of Saxony by Conrad III, elected King of the Germans/Romans, ca. 1137.

The Duke of Saxony at the time was Henry "The Proud" X (Welf/Guelph; inherited Duke of Bavaria), by marriage (to Gertrude, daughter and only child of deceased (1137) Holy Roman Emperor Lothair II (sometimes "III" ), House of Supplinburg (also Duke of Saxony).

He and Conrad had stood for election as King of the Germans/Romans on the death of Lothair, Conrad being elected (1137). Conrad decided his rival would be divested of his Duchy's, and granted Saxony to The Bear (if he could take it).

By this time The Proud had a son, Henry The Lion.

The Proud went to war with The Bear over the Duchy (1137). The Bear lost this conflict, however, The Proud had died suddenly in 1139.

The Lion continued the ultimate successful, for him, conflict, regaining the Duchy in 1142.

The article attributes this regaining only to "Henry," without these factual details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmasursky (talk • contribs) 22:25, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lmasursky: there should be "edit" links by each section header. Click on these to edit the sections. See Wikipedia:FAQ/Editing for more help. DuncanHill (talk) 22:31, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And if you click on the Edit tab between Read and View history, you get the whole article in the edit window. --Lambiam 09:45, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But remember that you need reliable sources to support your edit. The nice people at Wikipedia:Teahouse will help if needed. Alansplodge (talk) 10:13, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it, hope you like it better that way. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 21:58, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]