Humanities desk
< July 21	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 23 >

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.

July 22[edit]

Vital dates for H. Price Collier[edit]

All I know of Rev. Hiram Price Collier is that he published a book with the intriguing title Doubtful Experiments in Rhyme in 1888, and he married his best friend's widow.

I'd like to know when he was born and died. My searches have turned up nothing. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 05:02, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This site says:

Birthdate: May 25, 1860

Birthplace: Davenport, Scott County, Iowa, United States

Death: November 03, 1913 (53), Funen, Denmark

Place of Burial: Copenhagen, København, Capital Region of Denmark, Denmark

--Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 05:41, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks very much, CEZM. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:20, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Role reversal of the USA Republican and Democrat parties[edit]

Hello, role reversal in the USA binary political system has been published so much that there could (should) be a Wikipedia article on it. Is there? Is there any material available inexpensively for someone interested in a deeper study of that aspect? A simple web search pulls stuff out of a hat, but it is about as revealing as saying, these guys were left, and these guys were right.. and then they weren't... And it generally covers a narrow time period, i.e., it's usually an article about something else particular, not about role reversal itself. Any leads on that score? ~ R.T.G 10:30, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In its first years in the 1850s and 1860s, the Republican party was defined by anti-slavery, but fairly soon after the Civil War it started being the party of big business, and it's still the party of big business today, so there has been no reversal in that aspect. The GOP overwhelmingly attracted black political support until the early 1930s, when disgust with Herbert Hoover for reneging on a deal he made with black leaders after the 1927 floods, combined with FDR's New Deal, started changing things, but blacks did not become overwhelmingly affiliated with the Democratic party until the 1970s. Conservative Southern whites started shifting to the Republicans with the Barry Goldwater campaign in 1964, but this process took 30 years to be fully carried through... AnonMoos (talk) 12:36, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not so sure that the Republicans are the party of "Big Business" anymore. They seem more focused on small business. "Main Street" more than "Wall Street" (and definitely not "Silicon Valley"). Blueboar (talk) 13:20, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The 2017 Trump/GOP tax cut ("Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017") overwhelmingly favored large corporations and financial speculation type businesss (hedge funds, etc) over typical small businesses or "main-street" businesses. AnonMoos (talk) 13:30, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Believe it or not, but sometimes there is a discrepancy between what politicians say and what they do. --Lambiam 14:57, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! You mean you actually check? What's the point in that, of course... ~ R.T.G 20:51, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See also Nixon and his Southern strategy. Cheers ⌘ _hugarheimur 16:00, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Realigning election is somewhat relevant to this issue. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:09, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've read a little about the southern strategy elsewhere before, but this is definitely more depth. For the sake of discussion, this side of the pond there was New Labour and Blue Labour maybe 25 years ago, so it may be a relevant topic in general, thanks. ~ R.T.G 20:51, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Open–closed political spectrum (as opposed to left–right political spectrum) might be of interest as well. ---Sluzzelin talk 22:03, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fifth Party System and Sixth Party System may be of interest. (Links to the articles on all 6 Party Systems are listed in Political eras of the United States. --Wikimedes (talk) 05:57, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone determine the age of this illustration?[edit]

I have noticed that the art style of this illustration is not even remotely similar to other medieval art: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dame_guiraude_supplice.jpg

The foreshortening and other aspects of the artwork make it seem to be more like modern fantasy art than anything else. I don't speak French, but the text seems to be modern French. I know next to nothing about paleography, but even the handwriting seems to be modern.

But, the file itself is classified as being in the common domain due to age. I very much doubt it. BirdValiant (talk) 13:52, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not medieval... I would guess 19th century at the earliest, and probably 20th. You are right to question it. Blueboar (talk) 14:19, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Agreed, the faces and the depiction of flames seem to be modern too. This is the original source I believe, but no clues there. A reverse image search was found nothing older than 2008 and no attribution. Alansplodge (talk) 14:22, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it's an illustration at a museum somewhere. That'd be my guess. BirdValiant (talk) 14:34, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The information page at Wikimedia Commons has: "Quintilla y Cardona, Histoire du catharism". Google searches show references to several publications with Quintilla Y Cardona as the publisher, based in Barcelona (one as early as 1940), and in the 50s and 60s also a gramophone label.^[1] I suspect that Histoire du catharism is a book title, and that the illustration was made specifically for the book. --Lambiam 15:23, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lambiam: Thanks for your effort. My main concern is that if the illustration is from a modern book, then we might not have the right permission to use it on Wikipedia. At the very least, it wouldn't be right to say that it's in the common domain, if it's not. BirdValiant (talk) 15:48, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be a magazine: Histoire du Catharisme (Centre d'études cathares René nelli), le magasine des hérésies et des dissedences. Alansplodge (talk) 17:18, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've nominated the image for deletion at [2] because it seems like it's the right thing to do. If we're not sure we can legally use the image, and the signs are pointing to us not being able to, then it should be taken down. BirdValiant (talk) 17:39, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right. Alansplodge (talk) 20:00, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The French text, by the way, says: In the year 1211, the town of Lavaur having been besieged by Simon de Montfort and his crusaders, very high Lady Geralde, in repayment for her fine resistance, was thrown alive in a very deep well, was then covered with heavy stones; all this was done by the order of the cruel baron. —Tamfang (talk) 02:27, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]