Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2012 June 24

= June 24 =

Paris Syndrome
Paris Syndrome &mdash; fake? As far as I can tell, all the news of this supposed mental syndrome comes from a single academic in Japan, and it sounds to me like he's putting us all on. Comet Tuttle (talk) 16:01, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Sounds plausible to me, although all those different syndromes are really part of the same thing, if you ask me. When people are exposed to radically different things from their normal life, whether art, holy places, or tourist sites, the excitement and/or disappointment can trigger underlying psychological problems.  I suppose we will come up with many more "syndromes" at this rate (how about one for technology, like 3D movies and virtual reality ?). StuRat (talk) 13:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Anybody who has ordered a cup of coffee from a Parisian waiter has experienced "perceptions of being a victim of prejudice, aggression, or hostility"... 194.171.56.13 (talk) 09:57, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

WW1 Play about character with reduced mental capacity charged with desertion
I read a play about this some years ago now and can't remember the name of the character or the play (which is the same). Anyone got any ideas?? 90.17.194.234 (talk) 18:24, 24 June 2012 (UTC) Thanks! By a british playwright, and I think the main character is northern. I've looked on the list of WW1 plays on wikipedia and it's not there, and google comes up with nothing.


 * Possibly The Execution of Private Slovik.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 18:34, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Hmm, that film has no British associations and it's set in WW II. King & Country was a WWI British film about a soldier who was shot for cowardice, but not desertion as such.  I was also reminded of Paths of Glory, which is in WWI, but all the characters are French.  --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  20:23, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It's not Private Peaceful is it? I know it doesn't tick all your boxes, but there is a character with learning difficulties (brother of the eponymous hero who is shot for "cowardice") and it has been adapted into a stage play as well as the forthcoming film.  Ka renjc 21:16, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your suggestions, but in fact it's Hamp by John Wilson, which was the basis of 'King and Country'. Thanks anyway :) 90.17.194.234 (talk) 11:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I did mention the film version thereof. --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  20:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

The legal act of acknowledging a "bastard"
Was it possible for a married man to acknowledge his illegitimate child in any legal form? I know royal men could to this, but their example is not of any use, since they could do as they liked: I wonder more about non-royal men.

If a married nobleman wished to acknowledge an illegitimate child, did this have any legal significance? Did it give any rights to the child? Considering the legal class system of the time, did it have any importance of the child's mother was also a noble? My question is mainly about France before the revolution (1789).

Thank you. --Aciram (talk) 21:57, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Creating a last will and testament, acknowledging such issue born out of wedlock and granting s/he a an interest in his estate after death would be a good practical course to take. Will's tend to have precedence over set laws of inheritance. Even Romans left things to their favored slaves--Aspro (talk) 22:12, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I corrected the spelling of "precedence" for you. I hope you don't mind.Anonymous.translator (talk) 00:57, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Bianca Maria Visconti succeeded her father as Duchess of Milan despite having been born illegitimate.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 06:12, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Her father was the Duchess of Milan? --Trovatore (talk) 22:29, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No, he was the Duke of Milan. I suppose I should have said she succeeded him in the Duchy of Milan but I (wrongly) presumed people would have known what I was talking about here.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 06:25, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I could be wrong, but I rather strongly suspect our friend Trovatore has heard of a person called Queen Elizabeth II, and knows she succeeded her father, who was not normally known as Queen George VI. --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  19:33, 28 June 2012 (UTC)


 * It might depend on the specific time period and specific people involved. If you mean "before the Revolution" in a narrow sense (Valois/Bourbon dynasties), I can't help much there; but going back further into the Middle Ages, then yes, it would certainly be possible for a lesser noble (or even a non-noble, although surely not for a serf) to recognize an illegitimate child. But that could involve two separate questions. One is a religious problem, is there a way for the child to be recognized as legitimate according to the church? In that case, sure, if the church is willing to decree that the kid is legitimate. If the parents get married after the child is born, it wouldn't be too big of a problem. Donating land or goods to the church in return also wouldn't hurt. (I can think of one example from way back in the twelfth century, not in France but in Frankish Jerusalem, where the heir to the kingdom had to divorce his wife before he could become king - but the church nevertheless recognized their children as legitimate heirs. Not quite what you're asking, and they were royals, but still, there were mechanisms in place for this sort of thing). The other question is secular, i.e. can an illegitimate child inherit his or her parents' goods/property (assuming here, I suppose, that the child has not been declared legitimate by the church). I'm not sure what the laws were like in the Ancien Regime, but earlier than that there were plenty of local customs and legal codes. Sometimes local customs ultimately derived from Roman law, directly or indirectly, especially for things like inheritance laws. In some circumstances, like if the parents had no other legitimate children (or the legitimate children were dead), illegitimate children could certainly inherit. As Aspro mentioned, if the illegitimate child is recognized in a will, that could also override any other custom or law. Now that I read my answer again I see it's rather vague...it really depends on the circumstances. Adam Bishop (talk) 10:15, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, I was not sure that it was a good idea to specify, but since you ask: a married French nobleman in the 1730s, who has two sons with his wife, also has two sons with his acknowledged actress-mistress, and one daughter from a secret affair with an unmarried noblewoman who has runaway from her family and secretly lives on an allowance from him. The nobleman (he is a marquess) choose to recognise all three of his own free will and have them brought up on his expense.
 * My question is: was it possible for him to recognise them legally in some way, was there a procedure? I have read that Louis XIV had some sort of declaration made when he acknowledged his "bastards" with Montespan. And: did the acknowledgement in itself give them some sort of rights or informal social status? Was the situation of the daughter different in some way, because her mother was noble?
 * Perhaps this specification made it more interesting, I don't know! --Aciram (talk) 22:27, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * As far as I can tell, laws about inheritance/acknowledgment of heirs were fantastically complicated in the ancien régime, and were completely overhauled several times during the revolutionary period. It doesn't help that certain areas (Normandy, for example) were governed by slightly different customary laws than elsewhere in France. For the Louis XIV situation, the acknowledgement was (probably, although I have no source for this) accomplished via Lettre de cachet which allowed him to bypass laws completely. eldamorie (talk) 14:30, 28 June 2012 (UTC)