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.
can you tell me about the princess in the painting maids of honor? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catindy (talk • contribs) 01:09, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Most shields seem to be concave towards the Wielder: W)
and convex towards the unshielded Enemy: W)E.
Are there shields that are concave towards the unshielded Enemy: W(E
or concave towards both the Wielder and towards the unshielded Enemy?: W)(E
I thought targes were concave towards the enemy; but it seems if some actually are, then it's not very pronounced.
-- Jeandré, 2020-05-16t08:18z
No. The purpose of a shield is to deflect incoming missiles away from the holder, not to focus them.--Shantavira|feed me 09:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So the flattish File:Targe-shield.jpg with a ridge on the outside, is an inaccurate reproduction? Wouldn't it be good not to have weapons glance off shields towards people's legs, hands, arms, and heads, if the wielders weren't wearing armor? Wouldn't it be good when not wearing armor to instead have enemy weapons move towards the middle of the shield (or be stopped by spikes) so that the attacker has to pull it back and attack again, which should be much slower and so have less momentum?
I've found some pictures of shields that are concave horizontally, but nor vertically, tho they seem to be for use with lances and/or pole weapons like pikes: -- Jeandré, 2020-05-16t10:25z
Medieval Germany: An Encyclopedia (p. 26) says that from the start of the 15th century, shield designs changed and were often "bent forward at the top and bottom", presumably to channel away the force of a lance impact as in jousting. You wouldn't want the lance point to ride up and hit your face, or down and into your leg or horse. Alansplodge (talk) 11:38, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Iraqi Constitution and the selection of Iraq's Prime Minister
I have a question--in regards to the Iraqi Constitution and the selection of Iraq's Prime Minister, does the Iraqi Constitution use the term "largest bloc" or "winning bloc" to determine who should select the Iraqi Prime Minister after an Iraqi election? Basically, I just want to know if the Iraqi Constitution is specific about this bloc needing to be formed before an election (as the term "winning bloc" would appear to imply) or whether this bloc can be formed after an election (as the term "largest bloc" could imply).
Anyway, what are your own thoughts on this? By the way, this isn't merely a hypothetical question; after the 2010 Iraqi elections, Nouri al-Maliki was able to use the second definition (as in "largest bloc") to secure a second term for himself as Iraqi Prime Minister. Basically, I want to know if Maliki's 2010 position in regards to this issue was a legitimate act of constitutional interpretation or whether he was indeed acting lawlessly in regards to this. Futurist110 (talk) 19:57, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
_MET_DT240700.jpg)
