Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2021 March 27

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.

March 27

medium-term nobility

Life peerages have a long history in Britain, where they have have been all the rage since 1963; they are not unknown elsewhere. The kingdom of Portugal, I believe, often created noble titles for two lifetimes. (I don't know if this was done primarily when the grantee was elderly, or what.)

Have titles hereditary for a fixed number of generations been created in other kingdoms? —Tamfang (talk) 00:51, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

I seem to remember Thailand had some that expired after 4 generations. If you were at generation < 4, all your kids would inherit the title, and the 4 gen limit stopped the number of titleholders from increasing exponentially. This was in contrast with the British primogeniture system where only one of your offspring would inherit the title, but it never expired. 2602:24A:DE47:BB20:50DE:F402:42A6:A17D (talk) 05:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

I heard once that in imperial China noble titles dropped one level with each generation. —Tamfang (talk) 02:38, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

In Britain, British princes lose their title after 2 generations, the children and grandchildren of the monarch inherit it, but not the great-grandchildren. Thus, Prince Michael of Kent's son is simply Lord Frederick Windsor, with no princely title. --Jayron32 14:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

I'd quibble at that as an example: the British title of Prince is not inherited at all (in the sense intended by the question!). Prince Michael's brother succeeded their father as Duke of Kent, but both of them were Princes from birth. —Tamfang (talk) 02:38, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

QCs and notability

Is a person considered notable for the purposes of a Wikipedia article if they have been made Queen's Counsel or its foreign equivalent? I see a fair few QC articles but I can't quite tell. Thanks! Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 07:12, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

It points at notability and may tip the balance in otherwise doubtful cases, but this should not preempt the general WP:NPERSON notability requirements for people, in particular that of having received significant coverage etc. Depending on what they are known for, there may be more specific requirements, such as WP:NPOL for politicians.  --Lambiam 16:34, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

It might differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In Canada I would say absolutely not, as some (but not all) provinces give them out like candy; Alberta appointed 130 lawyers as QC last year alone, while Manitoba hasn't made a single appointment in twenty years. --24.76.103.169 (talk) 02:43, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Persian couplet

Greetings,

I am working on articles Tomb of Anarkali → Anarkali → Draft:Love in Pakistan

Following romance tragedy couplet in Persian language has been inscribed @ Tomb of Anarkali by 17th century Indian Emperor Jahangir.

Ta qayamat shukr goyam kard gar khwish ra

Ah! gar man baz beenam rui yar khwish ra

Though ref and English translations are available for above, I am looking for help in following 3 things if possible.

1 & 2) Couplet in original Persian script with ref source if available

3) Word by word translation (meaning) from Persian to English.

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 07:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

I find this on the web:

تا قیامت شکر گویم کردگار خویش را

آہ گر من باز بینم روئ یار خویش را

It is more likely that the actual inscription is in a calligraphic style for the Persian alphabet, such as nastaʼlīq. I can't give a word-by-word translation, but I can see that the two lines in the English translation correspond to the lines in Persian in the other order. Google translate produces this low-quality translation:

Until the Day of Judgment, I will thank my deeds

If I see my friend again

The word یار (yâr) can mean both "friend" and "lover".  --Lambiam 15:46, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

A reference for the transliterated poem, with a translation, can be found on this book page, which has more info on the fervour of Jahangir's love – "the madly-in-love Salim, [son of] Akbar". The transliteration is

Tā qiyāmat shukr gūyam kirdagār-i khvish rā!

Ah gar man bāz bīnam rū-yi yār-i khvish rā.

and the translation is

I would give thanks to my God until the day of resurrection,

Ah! Should I ever behold the face of my beloved again.

The footnote [62] states that (according to Andrew Topsfield, in his book Paintings from Mughal India, p. 171 n. 18) Robert Skelton has identified these verses as being from the 13th-century poet Saʿdī. The photograph on the page shows the use of nastaʼlīq.  --Lambiam 16:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

This is word by word translation (Persian couplet reads from right to left, and I will follow the same order): Tā (تا until) qiyāmat (قیامت the Day of Judgment) shukr (شکر thank) gūyam (گویم I say) kirdagār-i (کردگار God of) khvish (خویش oneself) rā (را is the particle serving as a sign of the definite direct object); Āh (آه oh) gar (گر if) man (من I) bāz (باز again) bīnam (بینم I see) rū-yi (روی the face of) yār-i (یار darling) khvish (خویش oneself) rā (را as above). Omidinist (talk) 00:36, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Lambiam: @Omidinist: All the help from you people make this forum really worth to visit and request information. Many many thanks, and warm regards Bookku (talk) 13:36, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Origin of family name "... de Santa Anna"

Where did the family name López de Santa Anna probably come from? Did the family originate from a town or village of that name? Was an ancestor in some church or aristocratic dignitary that entitled him to be named after a saint? Or what else? --KnightMove (talk) 09:59, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

In European culture (from which Mexican culture derives in this respect), names of this general form (in various languages) are often a territorial surname indicating that the family originated in a place of that name: in the case of an enoblement, a territorial title might be given by the relevant Crown somewhat randomly, but this family do not appear to have acquired the name in such a way (they do not appear to be armigerous, for example). However, see also Surname#Spanish-speaking world.

Allowing for possible spelling changes – 'Santa Anna' and 'Santa Ana' seem to be interchangeable, and the latter is more common as a place name – there are several places called Santa Ana in Mexico, the majority in the province of Oaxaca which borders the province of Veracruz where this particular family became prominent: there are also, of course, many other places in other Spanish-speaking countries with the name, as well as at least three in Spain itself, plus a prominent Church of Santa Anna in Barcelona. Without having any specific information, I would have expected the name to derive from Spain rather than having arisen in the Americas, but I could well be mistaken (and if so, hopefullly someone will be moved to correct me, and thus address your query more knowlegeably). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.35.136 (talk) 12:29, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

The addition of de Santa An(n)a to the very common patronymic surname López may have served a need to disambiguate it as the family rose to prominence. Compare López de Ayala, López de Cárdenas, López de Carvajal, López de Mendoza, López de Tovar, and López de Yanguas. If the addition was indeed spurred by a (relative) rise in prominence, the question can be posed whether this rise had occurred in Spain or only happened in Mexico. According to a genealogical tree, the father and paternal grandfather of the Mexican general and president were also named Antonio López de Santa Anna.^[1] The grandfather was probably born in the first half of the 18th century, but little seems to be known about him. I found no references to earlier people with this specific surname.  --Lambiam 14:53, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

OK, thank you both. --KnightMove (talk) 02:30, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Swearing in

When exactly will Julia Letlow be sworn in? 66.234.210.119 (talk) 11:07, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

According to this report (yesterday): "Letlow said she's hasn't been notified of the date she'll be sworn in." 2603:6081:1C00:1187:D889:B715:400:2256 (talk) 17:23, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

2021 Tasmanian state election

So the last few days I've been hearing brief coverage on the ABC about the upcoming Tasmanian election: the Speaker of the House of Assembly has left the Liberals, so the Government are now a minority and the Premier has called an election to get things back to normal. From our article I see that the Liberals had 13 of 25 seats, so presumably they're now down to 12/25. Question — how does the status of the Speaker affect anything? I thought the role of Speaker in a Westminster system was to be totally neutral, without any partisan activity whatsoever, so the Tasmanian speaker's party affiliation shouldn't matter one bit; where am I misunderstanding? Nyttend backup (talk) 11:25, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

The Speaker can vote (presumably with their party) in the event of a tie. [2]. (I believe this is the case for all Australian (federal and state) Speakers, and presumably for all Westminster-based systems.) Mitch Ames (talk) 12:35, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

But aren't there strict conventions on a Speaker's vote, so that the casting vote must always be the same in a given situation, regardless of who holds the position? Nyttend backup (talk) 12:42, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, under Speaker Denison's rule, the speaker may only vote if there is a tie, and then has to vote for further debate, or if that isn't possible, to maintain the status quo. Alansplodge (talk) 22:18, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

However, Casting vote#Exceptions says that both the New Zealand House of Representatives and the Australian Senate allow their speakers to vote along party lines, so the rule is not universally observed in Westminster system parliaments. Alansplodge (talk) 14:15, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Parliament of Tasmania - Role of the Speaker of the House of Assembly says:

"To assist their independence, Speakers do not have a vote in the normal parliamentary sense. Instead they have a casting vote which is used to decide an issue that has been deadlocked on an equal vote". Alansplodge (talk) 14:38, 28 March 2021 (UTC)