Humanities desk
< October 4	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 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.

October 5[edit]

Turnus's attempted suicide in Bk 10[edit]

Unexpectedly, I'm having a hard time finding any significant discussion on the enraged and frustrated Turnus, led away from battle by a specter of Aeneas. JSTOR is less than helpful--but surely there is discussion of this, right? Can you help me (and a student)? Drmies (talk) 01:39, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find a significant discussion either, but obviously Turnus is not merely frustrated; he feels humiliated, his honour squashed because it looks as if he cowardly avoided the battle – in his despair, overwhelmed by shame, death seems the better choice than living on in shame and dishonour. --Lambiam 09:13, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a whole chapter in Vergil's Aeneid and Greek Tragedy: Ritual, Empire, and Intertext (Cambridge University Press) discussing it in the context of Roman ritual. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 14:16, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Duckworth, George E. (February 1940). "Turnus as a Tragic Character". JSTOR 45419502. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help) "Turnus AND Tragedy" seems a useful search to find discussion, also "Turnus AND Ajax". fiveby(zero) 14:57, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Lambiam, fiveby, and 70.67.193.176 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), thank you so much! Fiveby, I saw the Duckworth article but it does not discuss the scene, only one word from it. I saw Ajax as well, but that's going too far for the class. Of course, I also watched the tragedy of Ajax last Tuesday. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies:, a few more snippets:

Mullens, H.G. (January 1939). "The Shape and Pattern of the Tenth Aeneid". JSTOR 45419993. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help) cited by Duckworth
Benario, Herbert W. (1967). "The Tenth Book of the Aeneid". JSTOR 2935865. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help) Turnus ignarus rerum vs. Aeneas rerumque ignarus, and fluctuat (680) and (683)
Garstang, J.B. (1950). "The Tragedy of Turnus". JSTOR 1086148. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help) just lists as peripeteia in his outline of the tragedy, but no discussion.

Benario does say ...the tenth book of the Aeneid has been more completely ignored than any of it's companions. and Duckworth This passage, it seems to me, deserves more emphasis than is usually accorded to it. Looking through the Vergilius bibliographies "Aeneid: Individual Books 7-12" sections turns up:

Quint, David (2001). "The Brothers of Sarpedon: Patterns of Homeric Imitation in Aeneid 10". JSTOR 40236202. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help), a longer discussion (mostly saving for later by Juno, not rage after), but if Ajax is going too far then this might be also.

It doesn't seem to be a popular passage. fiveby(zero) 19:07, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, Fiveby. So who's going to write all this up? ;) Drmies (talk) 20:54, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

doctrines[edit]

how is "due process of law" different from "procedure established by law". Grotesquetruth (talk) 08:40, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Due process requires handling in accordance with all rules established by law. These rules may or may not define specific procedures to be followed. Hearsay is generally not accepted as evidence. This is a rule, not a procedure. If a court, acting against this rule, allows inadmissible hearsay to be used as evidence, leading to a conviction, the due process rights of the defendant have been violated. --Lambiam 09:30, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See also substantive due process, and contrast with procedural due process. --Trovatore (talk) 19:39, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Eurasia Party Election Results[edit]

The Eurasia Party is neo-facist party in russia. It (or it's chairman) is said to have sigificant influence on the policies of Putin, especialy the invations in recent years.

Has it ever participated in elections and how many votes did it achive? 84.143.248.146 (talk) 16:41, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Eurasian Economic Integration: Law, Policy and Politics (p. 90) says that in a coalition called "Great Russia - Eurasia Party" it contested the 2003 Russian legislative election but only polled 0.3% of the vote, giving them one solitary seat of 450 in the State Duma. BTW, I'm not sure that a party based on Communism can properly be called Fascist, their ideology is described in our article as National Bolshevism, but they do have some points in common. Alansplodge (talk) 20:36, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that's the same group. From ru.wiki article on 2003 elections, the leadership of that coalition doesn't seem to have be linked with Dugin. --Soman (talk) 21:00, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, more detail in Aleksadr Dugin: A Russian Version of the European Radical Right?, assuming that the "Evraziia party" mentioned in the text is the same as the Eurasia Party under discussion. Alansplodge (talk) 19:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]