Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2019 November 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Humanities desk
< November 2 << Oct | November | Dec >> November 4 >
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.


November 3[edit]

Existence of nations before 18th century?[edit]

Do nations as category as we know them today exist before the rise of nationalism and national revival in the late 18th century? For examples, did ancient Greeks, Romans, and Chineses each have their own respective shared unified national identity regardless of their socio-economic statuses? Or are nations just made-up imagined category arbitrarily created by elites or other groups for their own purposes? 70.95.44.93 (talk) 01:16, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Nation, which you have probably already read, touches somewhat on these matters without providing a completely clear-cut answer, and has various links for further exploration. Of course, the World is a big place and History has a large span, so it is quite possible that similar concepts may have arisen and vanished several times in several different places and eras before becoming almost ubiquitous in modern times. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.179.237 (talk) 01:52, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Romans certainly had the concept of Roman citizenship, which conferred special privileges and obligations, and theoretically gave you the right to participate in Roman government (though you had to be physically present in Rome to exercise such rights, and they became fairly irrelevant under the Empire -- see Roman assemblies). Greeks as a whole were rarely politically united, but each individual city-state or polis had a strong political identity. AnonMoos (talk) 05:41, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The ancient Greeks did unite against common enemies, such as the Persians. SinisterLefty (talk) 07:02, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
United in a military sense, not merging independent political units into a larger one. AnonMoos (talk) 16:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
England could be described as a “nation“ before the seventeenth century (Certainly by the end of the Hundred Years War). Being on an island helps. Blueboar (talk) 13:41, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed: see The Hundred Years War and the ‘Creation’ of National Identity and the Written English Vernacular: A Reassessment which says: "The so-called ‘Hundred Years War’ and the creation of both English and French nationhood have been inextricably bound together in the historical imaginations of modern historians". Alansplodge (talk) 15:58, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The kingdom of Hungary was acknowledged as "a nation [hitherto] still unknown to us" by Pope Sylvester around 1000 AD, see Apostolic Majesty#First creation. DroneB (talk) 16:04, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Although the pope probably didn’t speak modern English in 1000 AD. I’m assuming this is one of those semi-translation errors, from Latin natio, which much rather means "a people". Cheers  hugarheimur 17:07, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In the late middle ages and Renaissance, a very prominent use of the word natio was to refer to students of a similar ethnic or geographical background at a university -- see Nation (university) -- but this has very little to do with the modern meaning of "nation"... AnonMoos (talk) 18:13, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Declaration_of_Arbroath (1320) is argued by some to be evidence of a sense of Scottish nationhood in the 14th century. Iapetus (talk) 13:36, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! We visited Newington Green,London, to see where our ancestors worked and lived in the British Enlightenment. One thing we didn't see was the W supposedly at one corner of the Green that is in memory of Isaac Watts. I also didn't see it listed in the Wikipedia article on Watts and if found, could be added to the site. We did tour the oldest terraces, New Unity Church and other sites in the area where Dr. Richard Price and his nephews William Morgan and George Cadogan Morgan lived and worked. We were happy to see new projects especially for Mary Wollstonecraft. There is much going on in the area. Our local guide also edits Wikipedia. Thanks for your time. 2600:1702:1C0:B8F0:E416:6ED:3088:CFF1 (talk) 20:55, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IP user. I'm glad you enjoyed your visit. Wikipedia is the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit: as long as you have a reliable published source, you are welcome to add the information to the article yourself. --ColinFine (talk) 22:11, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The "W" at Newington Green is mentioned in: The life & strange surprising adventures of Daniel Defoe (p. 9): "There is still in Newington Green today a terrace of houses dating back to the 1650s, as well as a wrought-iron gate with the monogram 'W', marking the site of the house of the Nonconformist hymn-writer Isaac Watts".
However, Historic England in its official listing says: "Frame and gate spanned by filigree pediment, ogival in outline, at the centre of which the initial "H" in an armorial shield. This may refer to Richard Heard, a London butcher who owned much of the area north of the Green at the close of the C16". There's a little photo at the very bottom of the page and it does look more like an "H" than a "W". Alansplodge (talk) 22:52, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Here's another view of that gate in Google Street View imagery; it's just slightly northwest of Newington Green itself. I certainly can't tell if it's meant to be an H or a W. --76.69.116.4 (talk) 04:16, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Historic England's quote is from the Listed building citation, so I think we can call that a reliable source. Alansplodge (talk) 09:43, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]