Humanities desk
< December 6	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	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.

December 7[edit]

Palace of Versailles[edit]

Louis XVIII and Charles X wanted to restore it as the royal court, but they couldn't because the prices were too high. Louis-Philippe I restored it, but only as a museum. Henry V had in his political program to re-use it as the old court? -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.239.131.190 (talk) 10:37, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Henry V" is more usually known as Henri, Count of Chambord. I'm not sure whether you're asking a question... AnonMoos (talk) 15:12, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The question may be whether Henri would have restored the Palace of Versailles as the royal court had he acceded in 1870. Couldn't find anything except that he chose a house in Versailles for his lodgings in France while the matter of his restoration was debated. [1] Alansplodge (talk) 15:30, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, closed. 95.239.131.190 (talk) 16:06, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 30, 1789[edit]

What were the names of the fourteen gardes françaises who were delivered by the mob from the Prison de l'Abbaye that day? Why they returden in prison on July 6 and were pardoned by the King? Who was the commander of that prison in that period? Were they later part of guard ammunition in July 12-14? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.239.131.190 (talk) 10:42, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Revolutionary Temper: Paris, 1748-1789 amd A People's History of the French Revolution both say that there were 11 soldiers. I couldn't fnd any source for their names. Presumably they were pardoned in an effort to appease the rioters, but again, no sources that I can see.

By "guard ammunition in July 12-14" perhaps you mean the Storming of the Bastille? It seems unlikely that the same soldiers were involved, since the garde bourgeoise had only been formed the day before and was composed of civilians rather than trained soldiers. Alansplodge (talk) 15:09, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I meant the Gardes françaises disertion in July 12, when the fight against the Royal-Allemand, and their part in the Storming of the Bastille. About the prison commander? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.239.131.190 (talk) 15:14, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From various sources there is a number of eleven gardes françaises freed from the Abbey prison. There might have been more information in a royal decree of amnesty on them, but it doesn't seem to be found in the usual places. Even the registers (in Versailles) of the regiment are mostly unavailable [2]. It's known that they ( the eleven) were aminstied after a request to Louis XVI from a delegation to Versailles by the freshly established "Electeurs de Paris" (the Electors of Paris [3]), an assembly made of burghers contributing the realm from 300F annually. --Askedonty (talk) 15:47, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you. Can you find the name of the royal commander of the Abbaye prison, so it's closed? 95.239.131.190 (talk) 16:05, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why, I think you may need to know whether their return to prison was a condition for their being granted pardon and whether the King maybe lost some precious time in more usefull consultations (the Electors's delegation was on July 4 I think) --Askedonty (talk) 16:22, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more interested in the commander of the prison. 95.239.131.190 (talk) 16:26, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In 1791 it's a Messeuir Baillon ( also commander of the Saint Germain Bataillon ) Décret 1791 . I'm keeping looking back in time. --Askedonty (talk) 16:35, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I meant the royal commander in June 30, 1789, during the mob attack. 79.54.234.109 (talk) 16:45, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, looking into it - I think it must be the same however. Baillon full military command is that of the bataillon des gardes nationaux de l'Abbaye Saint Germain Souvenirs_de_la_princesse_de_Tarente but the unit is also the 3rd Bataillon of Nassau Regiment (96th Infantry Regiment (France)) --Askedonty (talk) 16:52, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, since it was a royal military prison until June 30, 1789, when it was expugned and passed under the rebels' total control. 79.54.234.109 (talk) 17:03, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll need to see some solid good sources if I'm ever to acknowledge that. Only nine of the eleven guards chose taking the leave at that occasion, the other two must have thought they would not do it. Six other held soldiers and officers went also with it however. You are probably thinking about the resignation of the duc du Châtelet and the other officers of the Gardes Françaises, but that's only after the 14th. --Askedonty (talk) 17:53, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For the royal commandant, you can search sites about the military organization of the ancien regime in 1789. 193.207.212.224 (talk) 21:58, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I have for now is not absolutely conclusive. First to be noted the Abbaye prison is not precisely a fortress, and absolutely not comparable to the famous Bastille fortress. Looking at the Gardes Française operation style (Le spectateur militaire) there is not a senior officer in residence in that three stories city building. Le Héraut de la Nation (The Herald) is not a highly reliable source but a very comtemporaneous one and confirms Le Spectateur in that you would have to be calling it to the colonel for any other than a very trivial request. In my opinion the commander in title was the colonel of the Gardes (regarding "the Herald" they are mentioning famously feared "Dragoons" as the potential preventers when the crowd was moving back, other ulterior sources having two entire named regimental units swiftly tamed with offerings of crude red wine instead, so where is the truth). --Askedonty (talk) 22:37, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, closed. 193.207.212.224 (talk) 22:36, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hitler's successor as Führer?[edit]

Were there ever any plans about, if Nazi Germany had continued to exist after Adolf Hitler's death, who would have succeeded him as Führer of Germany? JIP | Talk 10:57, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Karl Dönitz did succeed him. --Wrongfilter (talk) 11:31, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That was a bit of a last minute decision though. Since 1939, Hermann Göring was the designated successor to Hitler, but he messed it all up in 1945 by sending the Göring Telegram asking for an early takeover, which upset the boss no end. Heinrich Himmler was next in line, but the BBC broadcast details of his attempts to broker a peace deal through the Swiss at about the same time as Göring's telegram, leading Hitler to make a will naming Dönitz, who was a loyalist but not a party activist, so a bit of an outsider. All this was one day before Hitler's suicide.

Considering that Hitler aimed to found an empire that would endure for a millennium, he doesn't seem to have thought of any sort of hereditary dynasty; rather he believed in Social Darwinism, whereby the strongest and most capable man would rise to the top regardless of status of birth. Alansplodge (talk) 14:26, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As most YouTube viewers will know, Eva's brother-in-law was never gonna get the gig. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:54, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of dictators don't have formally and publicly-designated successors, since such a person would naturally become an alternative power center by attract support from opportunistic individuals ingratiating themselves with the future ruler. (Similar to the Hanoverian dynasty in Britain in the 18th-century, where the heir to the throne / Prince of Wales was usually involved in the political opposition.) Lenin and Stalin didn't have one when they died. AnonMoos (talk) 15:22, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A counter-example is the Kim family of North Korea, who have successfully perpetuated their regime through imheritance. A less successful example was Francisco Franco who carefully groomed Juan Carlos to takeover his Fascist regime and simultaneously restore the Spanish monarchy, but it backfired because the first thing the new king did was announce a democratic election. Alansplodge (talk) 15:35, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good thing for Juan Carlos that after he made that decision, Franco remained dead. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:23, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In 1658, Oliver Cromwell was succeeded by his son Richard. That didn't last long. In 1968, the president of Portugal transferred power from António de Oliveira Salazar to Marcelo Caetano. Then there was a revolution...2A00:23C7:9CD1:3901:7762:1B1D:468A:BF09 (talk) 12:19, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Salazar never married or had children. That may explain why (a) he didn't bestow the presidency on his son, and (b) why he held on to power for so long (36 years). -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 17:19, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nicolae Ceaușescu's youngest son, Nicu Ceaușescu, was in line to inherit the dictatorship, despite being an alcoholic and gambling addict. His eldest son Valentin must have been thought to lack the credentials of a tyrant as he was only put in charge of a football club.

Also Qusay Hussein who was being lined up to take the reins from Saddam, in preference to his playboy older brother Uday.

And finally Bashar al-Assad, who in 1994 was recalled from studies at an eye hospital in London to learn how to be a dictator after his older brother was killed in a car crash, eventually stepping into the shoes of his father Hafiz al-Assad, on the latter's death in 2000. Alansplodge (talk) 17:47, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Opthalmology's loss.... I guess. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:59, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

:-) Alansplodge (talk) 18:30, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

From their own pages it's very clear, but can you help me to find a confirm that Charles Eugene, Prince of Lambesc and Henri Louis, Prince of Guéméné were absolutists, loyal to the ancien régime until their death? Thank you. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.239.131.190 (talk) 12:44, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've already find it myself. Closed. 82.54.238.145 (talk) 12:21, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for the article on Jaxa (state)[edit]

Jaxa has three citations. All appear to be obscure (to an American, I dunno if they're obscure in Poland) Polish sources. (At first I thought it was a hoax; it's not, I "verified" it's real with the help of Google books snippets and Google translate) I was wondering, since it appears to have a fascinating history, if anyone can help with English-language sources about it. Or non-English sources they can translate, for that matter. Thank you, 73.117.187.149 (talk) 16:39, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is, supposably, a good source published under the Polish Studies At Macquarie University, Sydney 1989, by one Stanisław Lukas entitled simply Jaksa, but it's very difficult to come by. --Ouro (blah blah) 17:01, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A brief mention in English is found here in footnote 57. --Lambiam 10:10, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

École militaire[edit]

The governator was Marquis Jean-Baptiste-César de Timbrune de Valence (1719-?). Can you help me to find his death date? Moreover, I once read that, when Napoleon was a cadet, that military school revered the Prince of Condé? Can you search a confirm? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.54.234.109 (talk) 17:10, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This just says "Deceased after 1793". This says "ca. [i.e circa] 1793". So it would seem to be unrecorded. Alansplodge (talk) 12:29, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but since he was escaped in Spain you can search here. And about Condé? 82.54.238.145 (talk) 12:43, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With Condé you're probably referring to Louis II de Bourbon. ~~But how would they've not?~~ --Askedonty (talk) 13:46, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, he was surely the paternal grandfather of Duc of Enghien. 193.207.101.121 (talk) 14:03, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Louis was himself still only Duc of Enghien when aged 23 he led the French to a great victory against the terrible imperial forces at Rocroi: 19 mai 1643. His eulogy by Bossuet must have been read aloud for more than decades and repeated in military schools and by private educators in the private homes of the aristocracy. I wouldn't even be sure that the College Louis le Grand was not named after him, if a were a young middle class Parisian I guess. --Askedonty (talk) 14:54, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Decides to Fingerprint European Travelers[edit]

I found this Deutsche Welle [4] article from nearly 20 years ago. It is about a proposed fingerprinting policy.

Did this policy ever get implemented?

Does this policy continue to the present day?

I searched the Visa policy of the United States and Visa Waiver Program articles and found nothing relevant.

I tried googling, but most results are about the new 2023 EU proposal to fingerprint American citizens visiting the EU.

I tried limiting my google search to 2010 to 2020, but most results are about fingerprinting requirements for US visas, which most EU visitors do not need to apply for.Liberté2 (talk) 23:38, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Australian, not European, but we're supposed have as good a relationship with the USA as anyone, except perhaps Canada. I have visited the US four times over the past 20 years. Never had a problem at the border. Last September, on my way to a cruise leaving from Seattle, I was fingerprinted when I arrived at Los Angeles. No problem arose, apart from the appalling equipment being used leading to the process taking a ridiculously long time. HiLo48 (talk) 03:07, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Am British, travelled to the US in 2005 and everyone was fingerprinted at customs. Nanonic (talk) 04:07, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. Sounds like all foreign visitors gets fingerprinted at the US border then. Liberté2 (talk) 06:12, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Look at this NY Times article for the 2002 Iranian Olympic team, who were very unsure of how they would be received in the U.S., but decided in advance that if they were asked to be fingerprinted, they would turn around in the airport and fly back to Iran. That didn't happen... AnonMoos (talk) 08:05, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Office of Biometric Identity Management article says that it was funded from 2005. This undated press release describes a change from 2 to 10 figerprimts being taken from international travellers. Alansplodge (talk) 12:41, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The 2009 press release says:

"For more than five years, Department of State consular officers and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers have been collecting biometrics—two digital fingerprints and a photograph"

So the 2 finger collection started some time around 2004 to 2005. And the 10 finger collection started some time around 2009, and continues to this day. Liberté2 (talk) 05:38, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, US and EU passports all include fingerprints in their biometric chips. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 01:46, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh? I (US) don't recall ever having prints taken. My last few renewals were by mail. —Tamfang (talk) 18:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm just wrong. Biometric passport says nope no fingerprint on US passports. I was probably confusing it with my being printed for TSA Pre. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 19:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]