Talk:History of the chair
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Referencing edit
This article needs it badly. --123.243.160.204 (talk) 10:21, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
roman chairs edit
Chairs
there was probably two types of chairs used in lullingstone. One had a rounded back which was made out of basket work. We found carvings on tombstones which show this sort of chair was normally occupied by a women. The other type of chair had a straight back but was made out of wood.
There's a contradiction between this article and the Chair of Saint Peter article. If there's not a reference we should probably remove it. Aharriso (talk) 05:37, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Explosm edit
This page was used in an explosm comic. Just thought i'd pass that along http://www.explosm.net/comics/1128/ Kirby17 (talk) 17:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Roman chairs edit
I quote from this article: "The characteristic Roman chairs were of marble".
How can a characteristic chair be made of marble? Surely, characteristic chairs were made of wood (some, although more rarely, were of metal). It is the totally uncharacteristic ceremonial chairs of officeholders or bulit-in chairs for officials found in the public venues that might have been made of marble. --B. Jankuloski (talk) 21:54, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- Most of this article, including the quote on Roman chairs of marble, is from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica. See: http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tim_Starling/ScanSet_TIFF_demo&vol=05&page=EB5A837 Samw (talk) 17:04, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
- B. Jankuloski is perfectly correct. The type of chair for ordinary use most commonly depicted in Roman art is of basketwork. Others were of solid wood or metal.
- Sadly, the 1911 EB text is a product of the limited knowledge of its day and contains a great many errors. I am a furniture historian and took the liberty of correcting the nonsense that "The majority of the chairs of all countries until the middle of the 17th century were of oak without upholstery" (they were made from many timbers; oak just survives better) but there are many other errors in the EB text and it would need a complete rewrite of the whole article to bring it anywhere near up to modern standards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.151.147 (talk) 21:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Off-wiki attack edit
| Nothing of value to see here |
|
There is an organized, off -wiki attack by white supremacists to vandalize this article with neonazi talking points. Please be advised. ExpertPrime (talk) 22:54, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
|
Cited history of the chair edit
Tables, chairs, and modern-style furniture we know today was invented by the Egyptians in the BC era and eventually made its way to Europe via North African culture’s interactions with Rome: https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/3948
The modern-style furniture referenced above was introduced to sub-Saharan Africans by the Portuguese in the 15th century. Prior to this, for formal seating, Sub-Saharan Africans used tree stumps that were trimmed into “round blocks of wood” called “stools” that were then decorated with tribal ornaments: https://mukangoafrica.co.za/what-is-the-history-of-african-furniture/
Sub-Saharan Africans did not have the chair until Europeans introduced it to them. 2600:6C5E:14F0:9BC0:1472:B13B:7AE8:83E8 (talk) 12:13, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- The source you have provided does not say that "Sub-Saharan Africans did not have the chair until Europeans introduced it to them". It says that certain design elements were brought by Europeans in the fifteenth century, such as the elbow chair and the sedan chair. ... discospinster talk 16:30, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
The first Europeans to reach the East African coast were the Portuguese, and they already noted chairs were present in Malindi and constructed with local materials;
“In 1498, Vasco de Gama paid visits to Mombasa and Malindi, describing Malindi as a noble city where the king's palace was adorned with lavish carpets, and furnished with chairs plated with gold and ivory.” - Tales of French Corsairs and Revolution Book 1 By Serge Lionnet · (1999) page 233
--GoldenDragonHorn (talk) 21:11, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- It would be worth noting that the original Malindi kingdom of African Bantu/Swahili origin was destroyed around 1,000 CE. The Malindi that de Gama arrived at was the establishment created in the 13th century CE by the Arab Kilwa Sultanate, and the architecture--and furniture, including the chairs--was of Arabic influence, which itself already had influence from European design by then. At that time, de Gama admired the Sultan's palace and furnishings, but noted the Bantu/Swahili people served as the labor force and coastal merchants/traders of the city. So the chairs noted by the Portuguese upon their arrival do not support a Sub-Saharn African chair origin or design, but rather Arabic. Refer to Esmond Martin's work on Malindi. 97.66.209.126 (talk) 23:56, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Do you have any other sources? Tales of French Corsairs and Revolution is a historical fiction.NecroFamiliar (talk) 04:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Fair enough, here are two;
“At the East African city-state of Malindi, da Gama was greeted by a king seated on a bronze chair and wearing an ornate robe trimmed in green satin” - World History: Comprehensive Volume - Page 386
And;
“Such paraphernalia are known to have been fairly common in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, but their existence at some locations already in the late Middle Ages appears equally certain. Ibn Battuta found a cloak, a palanquin, sandals, a turban, drums, and the ubiquitous siwa at Mogadishu in 1331, while two Portuguese witnesses report seeing a chair, a canopy, a turban, and two siwas at Malindi in the late fifteenth and early seventeenth centuries.” - Horn and Crescent Cultural Change and Traditional Islam on the East African Coast, 800-1900 By Randall L. Pouwels, Randall Lee Pouwels · 2002 - Page 28
Malindi is in sub-Saharan Africa, and chairs were noted to be already pre-existing in that locale before any European presence, therefore the claim that ‘chairs were absent in sub-Saharan Africa before the Europeans’ is academically incorrect. Cheers. --GoldenDragonHorn (talk) 02:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. NecroFamiliar (talk) 05:22, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Looking them over, the latter doesn't contradict the earlier claim that the Portuguese introduced chairs, with it supposedly happening in the 15th century, and the two Portuguese witnesses seeing a chair in the LATE 15th and early 17th (did the two Portuguese visit over a century apart, or is this supposed to be 16th?) centuries.
- For the former, I can't find a copy that I can read without buying, but I found another account of Vasco da Gama's history (https://www.gutenberg.org/files/46440/46440-h/46440-h.htm, if you're curious). He met the king (possibly the king's son) of Mombasa in 1498, so that's a point in your favor. On the other hand, they were Muslims, meaning that they had contact with the Middle-East at some point before 1331 (Ibn Battuta noted that they were Shafi'i Muslims, with well-built mosques), so we can't be sure if they developed the chairs themselves or if they were introduced by the Middle-East. Honestly, there just isn't enough information to say one way or the other. Or if there is, I don't know where to find it. NecroFamiliar (talk) 06:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, wait. 15th century is 1400-1500. My bad. Never mind, that also happened in the late 15th century. I also thought that the link to the Brooklyn Museum was a different link that I had seen earlier, which is why I said that the latter citation didn't contradict it.
- "Most seats in sub-Saharan Africa are low stools, carved from a single block of wood. Yet, as early as the sixteenth century, Portuguese traders and explorers introduced chairs with backs to southern and eastern Africa. Chokwe artists soon began to produce similar chairs, adding sculptural scenes and Chokwe motifs. This wood chair was carved as an object of status for a chief."
- https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/2899
- Though, this would contradict da Gama's records. NecroFamiliar (talk) 06:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- That's right. The original claim possibly originated from Sarpong's "The sacred stools of the Akan", and then been inflated to include all of sub-Saharan Africa :
- "Considered concretely, the Ashanti stool is nothing but a wooden seat of artistic design for practical use. Before the introduction of chairs by Europeans, every Ashanti had many of these seats for use in his house. The introduction of chairs has not put an end to the importance of stools. For even yet, by far the greatest majority of the houses have more stools than chairs, and it would not be easy to find a house without a stool"
- However, this seems quite vague, outdated and not based on anything tangible. I'll try to research more on the subject and add it to the page. Bastobasto (talk) 17:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Sumerians edit
The Standard of Ur cuts the deal. Chairs are so well established there you needn't look up Egypt to make the case for the most ancient one. Also, establishing Egypt as the typical source of Mediterranean culture is a classic Western bias that originated in the late 18th Century. Look up Orientalism by Edward Said, which is the benchmark book. I am tired of people reiterating clichés that started circulating with the French and British colonial rule over Egypt. Egypt was a great civilization but it is not the source of everything known to man. 78.210.157.88 (talk) 00:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- This would be OR if used in an article, but I just looked at some pictures of the Standard of Ur, and I must say, I didn't see any chairs. There were some chariots, but no chair-iots. Are there chairs depicted on a different face of it or something? Joe (talk) 04:39, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- There literally were chairs.
- What is this guy doing if not sitting on a chair?
- https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b6/Ur_lyre.jpg/1024px-Ur_lyre.jpg 107.2.4.37 (talk) 16:24, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- Is that what that's supposed to be? To me, it looks like his legs are walking away from him, but if scholars think that particular pose is meant to represent 'sitting on chair,' far be it from me to say otherwise. Feel free to add something about it if you've got some RS. Joe (talk) 01:10, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Improvement: chair safety edit
Chair Safety is a recognized safety topic underneath American OSHA CFR-29 standards. It is required training in many industries, such as industrial drum filling. There should be an additional section concerning this, but I don't want to just link JJKeller articles and similar about it as that would constitute Original Research. There aren't many other sources on this topic, unfortunately. Please advise. 2001:5A8:657:9:0:0:2:4F0B (talk) 03:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- Probably a better topic for the Chair page, or the Safety page, or maybe even its own page, rather than this one. If you've got any questions about whether something constitutes a reliable source or not, please post a reference and I'll share my thoughts. It truly is a wonderful thing to see so many bright and eager new editors taking a deep interest in chairs and chair-related topics. Joe (talk) 04:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Content removal edit
It looks like Simonm223 (talk · contribs) has removed an entire section, including a message instructing editors to leave that section alone, all without consensus. Suspiciously similar to what ExpertPrime (talk · contribs) was previously doing, and for which they received a temporary block and final warning. I will be reverting these edits shortly - if there are any concerns, please discuss in this thread. Dennis Russel III (talk) 13:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hooh...you should at least wait some hours before reverting. The removal was done because of Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1153#4chan raiding on the history of chairs as the edits weren't well sourced. Your revert has been reverted. Lectonar (talk) 13:10, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- You should pay more attention to article talk and to the WP/ANI thread regarding why that (poorly sourced) material was removed. Simonm223 (talk) 13:11, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Furthermore the "message instructing editors to leave that section alone" was highly inaccurate. Simonm223 (talk) 13:16, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Dennis Russel III Why do you keep re-inserting this? Especially the hidden message is grossly inappropriate for Wikipedia. Simonm223 (talk) 14:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Dennis Russel III I'm reaching out to the admin who previously blocked ExpertPrime for guidance. However the section I deleted was very weakly sourced and the hidden comment was explicitly contrary to the sources so I'd suggest it might be wise to actually talk about this text rather than us going back and forth in reverts. Simonm223 (talk) 15:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Noted. My second revert was made before noticing the responses to this thread, so I wasn't aware of the ANI discussion at the time. Tbh, I'd recommend copying the result of that discussion to this talk page (or at least linking it) as otherwise to me it simply looked like the edit wars from last week were resuming. Dennis Russel III (talk) 16:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Dennis Russel III I'm reaching out to the admin who previously blocked ExpertPrime for guidance. However the section I deleted was very weakly sourced and the hidden comment was explicitly contrary to the sources so I'd suggest it might be wise to actually talk about this text rather than us going back and forth in reverts. Simonm223 (talk) 15:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Dennis Russel III Why do you keep re-inserting this? Especially the hidden message is grossly inappropriate for Wikipedia. Simonm223 (talk) 14:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Furthermore the "message instructing editors to leave that section alone" was highly inaccurate. Simonm223 (talk) 13:16, 22 April 2024 (UTC)