Humanities desk
< April 12	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	Current desk >

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.

April 13[edit]

What caused Popham Colony to fail?[edit]

I ask this seemingly simple question because it doesn't appear to be so simple. Strangely, after all this time, there isn't a conclusive, all-encompassing answer; the facts are muddy, with different historians providing different reasons. Our article on the New England Colonies best summarizes this conclusion: "The colonists faced a harsh winter, the loss of supplies following a storehouse fire, and mixed relations with the local Indian tribes." Is this the conventional view, or have better answers arisen in recent years? Viriditas (talk) 03:16, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you take a look at the Wikipedia article Popham Colony? It says there:

In May 1608 a supply ship brought a message that Sir John Popham had died. The supply ship returned to England with a cargo. When Mary and John returned in September 1608, it brought news that Gilbert's elder brother John had died. Gilbert thus inherited the title and the estate of Compton Castle in Devon. He decided to return to England and as no other leader was found, the colony decided to disband and the remaining colonists sailed home in Mary and John and Virginia. (The Virginia would make at least one more Atlantic crossing, going to Jamestown the next year with the Third Supply, piloted by Captain James Davis.)

The colony lasted just 14 months. It is likely that the failure of the colony was due to multiple problems: the lack of financial support after the death of Sir John Popham, the inability to find another leader, the hostility of the native people and the French, and the cold winter. Sir Francis Popham (son of Sir John) tried several times to reestablish the colony, but was unable to get the financial backing. The settlement of New England was delayed until it was taken up by refugees instead of adventurers.

Random person no 362478479 (talk) 04:01, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly did, and there’s information there and elsewhere that is somewhat contradictory. Also, there’s been a lot of new information about the colony since the excavation from 1994-2004, so I’m wondering if new information has come to light about the failure of the colony. Viriditas (talk) 04:10, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, OK. I was surprised that you only referred to the New England Colonies article.

This book from 2022 suggests that apart from the death of the financial backer a souring of relations and breakdown of trading with the native Wawenock played an important role:

https://books.google.de/books?id=0Ct4EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA109&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false

Random person no 362478479 (talk) 07:17, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an article that may of interest. Unfortunately I don't have access:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/24474845 Random person no 362478479 (talk) 07:21, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And this dissertation also seems relevant:

FINDLEY JR, JAMES WALTER, Ph.D. “Went to Build Castles in the Aire:” Colonial Failure in the Anglo-North Atlantic World, 1570-1640 (2015).

The fulltext is available here: https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/FindleyJr_uncg_0154D_11618.pdf

Random person no 362478479 (talk) 07:25, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, we don't know a lot about quite a few failed colonial ventures of the time. Famously, we're not really sure what happened to Roanoke Colony either. 400+ year old history isn't always well documented, and from what scant records and archaeological evidence there is, there is lots of room for competing theories, none of which is any more plausible than any other. --Jayron 32 12:18, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The theories need not be "competing", nor "contradictory"; it is most likely a combination of factors as previously noted, (and supported by additional sources)^[1]^[2]^[3] --136.56.52.157 (talk) 13:45, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely; my main point was that the necessary information to understand why some particular event from 400+ years ago occurred are not often available. Popham colony is not particularly exemplary in terms of confounding analysis. --Jayron 32 14:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help understand Macedonian Bulgarians identity concerns[edit]

While handing a WP:3O request I came across an ethnicity dispute about whether to label Petar Poparsov as a Macedonian Bulgarians or not. I am quite uninitiated in this topic and wish to understand does it matter to people beyond Wikipedians or it's likely to be local Wikipedian issue. If it matters beyond Wikipedia then why does it matters it either way to either side? I am asking here instead of article t/p to have independent overview of the background. Bookku (talk) 08:37, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a place for editors to advance ethnonationalist views, and adminstrators are requested to intervene when things get out of control. That type of behavior is forbidden. On the other hand, rigorously neutral and well-referenced edits are always welcomed. Cullen328 (talk) 08:51, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As to why it matters to some people; see Bulgaria-North Macedonia relations:

The acknowledgement of Bulgarian influence on the Macedonian history is highly problematic for many Macedonians, because it clashes with the post-WWII Yugoslav Macedonian nation-building narrative, which was based on a deeply anti-Bulgarian stance. Another revisionist strand of the Macedonian historiography is that their national history had already been taken earlier by the Bulgarian national historiography. The resurgence of Bulgarian irredentism due to the deepening of chauvinism and national historical myths in post-Communist Bulgaria has awarded Macedonia a place in Bulgarian nationalism akin to that of Kosovo in Serbian ideology, as Bulgarians are frustrated with the existence of a Macedonian nation, which they consider "artificial", and of a Macedonian language, which they consider a dialect of Bulgarian.

Alansplodge (talk) 11:37, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some of them blame Horace Lunt for giving the language scholarly respectability in the English-speaking world... AnonMoos (talk) 11:57, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As a rule of thumb, ethnicity always matters in the Balkans and has spawned more wars than you could shake a stick at. If you require an object lesson in why ~~patriotism~~ nationalism is not always a good thing, look no further. Alansplodge (talk) 18:53, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are those who distinguish patriotism and nationalism. From Patriotism

George Orwell, in his influential essay Notes on Nationalism distinguished patriotism from the related concept of nationalism:

By 'patriotism' I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force upon other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.[15]

--Error (talk) 17:01, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both, I am now enlightened. Alansplodge (talk) 11:37, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Bulgarian. Regarding the language, the stance is so deeply rooted, both officially and unofficially, that any Bulgarian text that mentions Macedonian without somehow reminding that it is "not a language" would look clueless, or fake, or awkwardly avoiding the topic due to some kind of Western-style political correctness.

Greece, on the other hand, doesn't have problems with the language itself, but calls it 'Slavomacedonian' due to the naming dispute. In a bookstore in Skopje a couple of years ago I saw an "ΕΛΛΗΝΟΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΙΚΟ / ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΟΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΟ ΛΕΞΙΚΟ" (Greek-Macedonian / Macedonian-Greek dictionary). This, written in the Greek language, looked just weird. It was by Macedonian authors, of course. --Theurgist (talk) 06:16, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bear games Category[edit]

Bear games are hunt games? if no, what Category are they? 89.97.104.35 (talk) 15:37, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At the very bottom of the article are 'Categories'. Listed are Abstract strategy games and Traditional board games. --136.56.52.157 (talk) 16:04, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

consular region of Canada for Consulate General/Embassy of the P.R.C.[edit]

The US is served by several Consulate General/Embassy of the P.R.C.. Their respective consular region is described by this map[4].

Is there an analogous map for Canada? Specifically, I'm interested in the demarcation line between the Embassy of China, Ottawa and the Chinese Consulate General in Toronto. Both of them are in the province of Ontario, so I'm interested in how Ontario is divided between the two. Mel Gervais (talk) 17:29, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This has your answer. It looks like the main embassy in Ottawa covers only the Ottawa region, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, and Nunavut, while the Toronto Consulate covers the balance of Ontario and Manitoba. All of the other provinces are covered by the other consulates in Vancouver, Calgary, and Montreal. --Jayron 32 18:13, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!!! Mel Gervais (talk) 20:36, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can a sitting president go to jail?[edit]

Indictment of Donald Trump currently says that Trump can still become president even convicted. Three things:

1) According to Absolute immunity#Presidential immunity, presidential civil immunity appears flexible and the president could be convicted by federal courts for offences committed before assuming office.

2) According to Presidential criminal immunity in the United States, presidential criminal immunity is unchartered territory. However, Ulysses S. Grant’s arrest has set a precedent that an incumbent president can be arrested for criminal offences committed while in office.

4) Even if a DOJ memo prevents prosecution of the president, any federal court could easily overrule the memo.

3) Trump’s indictment are state charges not federal charges. As with executive clemency, presidential authority is limited to the federal government.

All of this begs the question if Trump is really completely safe from prison, even as sitting president. User23242343 (talk) 17:40, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is still an open question. To wit :the Constitution is silent on whether a president can face criminal prosecution in court, and the U.S. Supreme Court has not directly addressed the question. You will find a lot of blather both ways on the matter, but insofar as the situation has never been tested, it is an unanswered question. It's especially problematic as not only has the matter never been tested, it isn't even covered by the text of the U.S. Constitution. The best information we have on the matter is a memorandum from 1974 from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel which says that it was that Office's belief at the time that President's could not be so charged or put on trial. This was re-affirmed by another memo from the same Department. However, this just amounts to the fact that the Justice Department wouldn't prosecute such a crime. There was (and is) some question as to whether non-Justice Department personnel who have otherwise been legally empowered to do so, could initiate such a prosecution. Such as, say, a special prosecutor, who may not be bound by the decisions of the Justice Department's legal counsel; indeed the special prosecutor is specifically appointed to be entirely independent of the machinery of the federal government, to avoid conflict-of-interest issues. On the balance, it likely wouldn't happen, but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen. The law only is a strong as the power of those in charge; and insofar as there are legal matters open to multiple interpretations and for which there is no precedent, that leaves a lot of leeway for people to do whatever. --Jayron 32 18:09, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is only an opinion, but I expect that the courts would rule that a jail sentence would be delayed until the end of the sitting president's term in office, but that fines or other remedies would be immediately applicable. Cullen328 (talk) 07:21, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gagarin on a photo[edit]

The photo, as per its source, claims to show Yuri Gagarin together with Valentina Tereshkova, but to me neither of two men standing in the car look like Gagarin. A factual error? 212.180.235.46 (talk) 22:29, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An der Seite ders Ersten Sekretärs der ZK der SED und Vorsitzenden des Staatsrates, Walter Ulbricht, nahmen die beiden Kosmonauten auf der Ehrentribüne Platz. here they are with Gagarin in uniform. He was probably in the next car. fiveby(zero) 00:22, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From the full description of the picture:

Hier begrüßt Valentina Terschkowa, gemeinsam mit den DDR-Sportlern Hirsch, Ingrid Krämer (2.v.l.) und Dieter Pophal (ganz links) die sportbegeisterten Berliner.

Here Valentina Terschkowa, together with GDR athletes Hirsch, Ingrid Krämer (second from left) and Dieter Pophal (far left) greets the sports enthusiastic people of Berlin.

So the picture is from an event where Gagarin was present, but he is not in this picture. Random person no 362478479 (talk) 20:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's excellent work, people. --Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing! 08:37, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]