Humanities desk
< November 29	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	December 1 >

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 30[edit]

Help with finding Articles of Countries[edit]

This may seem sort of strange, and badly written since this is my first time asking a question, but would anyone know of a program of sorts or a category tag or even another article itself that would hold information about every article, on the English wiki at the very least, of every Country? And by this I mean not just countries that're around right now, I mean every Article of a country, regardless of how truly independent it was or how much information is on the article.

This isn't for business reasons but for personal reasons, and trust me if I knew how to search for every country article already I gladly would, but with over 50+ million articles on the English wiki itself I doubt I'd ever manage to get to the end on my own.

Thanks if anyone does help with this, I'll see one day if not to try and search myself, or learn a faster way -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:6000:1513:C2B1:601E:36FD:4B2D:2DAA (talk) 07:49, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you go to Category:Countries, you'll see various links that progressively get you to every country, and each country's category (e.g. Category:Spain) will contain a great many links to sub-categories and articles about stuff relevant to that country. Start there. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:22, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are templates for linking <topic> between countries; they appear at the bottom of the relevant countries topic page. Note however, there are some countries with limited recognition, which may or may not be listed below. LongHairedFop (talk) 09:30, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:World_topic Template:African_topic Template:Americas_topic Template:Asian_topic Template:European_topic Template:Oceania_topic

There's also the feature Special:PrefixIndex for getting a list of pages that start with a certain string, which generates lists like all pages starting with Latvian or all pages starting with Botswana. Just sub your own string in after https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex/ (NB it is case sensitive). 70.67.193.176 (talk) 19:38, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Traitors in the Camp[edit]

On December 30, 1881 a letter to the editor by Lewis Carroll with the title "Traitors in the Camp" appeared in the St James's Gazette (about ritualist tendencies in the Anglican Church or something like that). I succeeded to find scans or at least the text of all his other contributions to that newspaper, but this one I couldn't find. That's why I ask you for help. Can anyone find a scan or transcript of that letter?

I already looked in https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/ (which is where I got most of the other letters from), but the year 1881 is missing there. In Life and Letters Collingwood quotes some of the letters to the St James's Gazette, but not this one. The Lewis Carroll Handbook (and other bibliographies) don't mention any reprint (but that's from 1979, so by now there could be one). The Pamphlets of Lewis Carroll series by the LCSNA (https://www.lewiscarroll.org/publications/books/) doesn't reprint it (that's where I have another letter from 1881 from). The title of the letter isn't ideal to search for it with Google. And I can't think of another way to search for that letter.

So, are you able to find it? --132.230.195.147 (talk) 18:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can at least tell you that it was published in full in the seventh volume of Edward Wakeling's edition of Carroll's Diaries, but using such of it as appears in Google Books' snippet view to serve as a search term doesn't turn up any results. It seems there's no full text of the letter within reach of Google. --Antiquary (talk) 21:35, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not on HathiTrust either, at least in full-text (the Wakeling edition of the diaries does come up so you can at least consider it confirmed). The phrase "that genial and simple-minded abstraction" seems to be a good search query for it. But I don't see it anywhere. Your best bet is probably to try and get a librarian someplace that has the book mentioned above (ISBN 0904117065) to scan and e-mail you the page(s) (beginning at 388 according to HathiTrust) as a sort of interlibrary loan. 199.66.69.13 (talk) 23:55, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if he would've used it on a letter to the editor, but did you try searching for Carroll's real name (Dodgson)? --174.95.161.129 (talk) 23:58, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here is how much I could extract using search magic:

Sir, – Would the British public – that genial and simple-minded abstraction that stands for ever on the broad grin, with its hands in its pockets, always ready for a game of "Open your mouths and shut your eyes!" – would that amiable and ecstatic infant be deeply surprised to learn what are the "wheels within wheels" that move that great moral enigma, the Church Association? Would it shudder, or simply chuckle, to be told that among the most influential supporters of that Society – not its most prominent members, observe; not those whose names are flaunted like a banner in the eyes of an admiring world; but those far more powerful background figures, the wire-pullers – are to be found: first, certain advanced Ritualists, bold spirits whose further advance is only checked by the thought that the next step would be to Rome; secondly, certain actual members of the greatest, the most secret, and the most unscrupulous of all fraternities, the Jesuits?
The battle is set in array, and the Church Association advances to the fight. In the foreground caper the band of skirmishers, yelling with Protestant enthusiasm, haunted by no shadow of a doubt but that the cry "To gaol with them!" so stealthily suggested by an invisible prompter, is the war-cry that must shortly change into the pæon victory. But glance a little further back into that dark tent where certain figures in masks and cloaks are gathered in secret consultation. Why do these warriors hide their faces? Dare they not face the light of day? And what mean these constant relays of messengers that leave them ever and anon, and, creeping through the brushwood and carefully skirting the edges of the fight, go off at full speed to the headquarters of the foe? Is there treachery in the camp? The thing is possible.
If it be not so, then who is it – in the name of outraged common sense I ask the question – who has invented this worse than suicidal policy, the imprisonment of Ritualists? Does any sane man suppose that any persecuted Ritualist does not thankfully seize the opportunity of posing as a martyr? Does any sane man doubt, when the English Church Union hold their monster indignation meetings, and loudly protest against the imprisonment of their champions, that each of the furious

At that point I reached a barrier that did not yield to any of my dog-Latin incantations. --Lambiam 00:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A bit more:

"...furious orators is really thrilled with a secret delight? "Oh let us be joyful!" Would be the opening chorus of all such meetings, if only they dared show the "hand" they hold in this deep and dangerous game. Let all who love the Reformed Church of England pause and ponder. And do not be taken in, oh too-easily gullible British public, by all these piteous outcries. “Why, oh, why do you imprison us?” cries the orator. “We are the lambs and you the wolves! We do but stand up for Truth, for the Right, for the..."

Alansplodge (talk) 11:36, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"...for the Right, for the Church! Why will you not let us alone? We never persecute you! We never drive you into prison!” And the wail rises into a shriek; but as it dies away, if you put your ear close and hold your breath, you may chance to hear him mutter, in quite another tone, “ We are such fools!” And if you watch him narrowly you may even be lucky to catch the crafty smile that flits like a dream across those quivering lips, and to detect a quiet twinkle in the eyes so lately brimming over with crocodilian tears. Such was the tone of a recent manifesto, issued by the president of the English Church Union, where he spoke of those who have suffered legal penalties for disobeying their Bishops, in language that would not have been out of place if he had been describing martyrs who have chosen death rather than abjure their faith." End of paragraph. Can anyone else pick up the baton? --Antiquary (talk) 13:02, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"And in prison," so chorus the delighted English Church Union, "because he conscientiously refuses obedience to a secular court." It is mere waste of breath to point out to these impassioned orators that he also refuses obedience to his ecclesiastical superior, the Bishop whom he has solemnly sworn to obey: the argument has no more hold upon them than a syllogism has upon a lady, or a drop of rain upon a duck. They have even discovered a new and most astonishing axiom in morals – that whatever you are ordered to do by any one to whom you owe no allegiance you may rightly refuse to do, even if it be also ordered by a lawful authority. This is very much as if some sturdy Briton should vindicate his freedom from French control by obstinately refusing obedience to English laws wherever the two national codes happened to agree. The only consolation, which the Protestant portion of the English Church (under which title I include all, whether High, Low, or Broad, who hold to the principles of the Reformation) are likely to find in the present miserable state of things, is the thought that now at last we have a crucial test as to whether Ritualism is or is not suited to the genius of the English nation. "You have had every chance," they can now say to the Ritualists: "your choral services have charmed our ears, your rich vestments our eyes, and even your incense our noses! And now you have the darling wish of your heart: you are persecuted: you can appeal to the ineradicable instinct which ever impels John Bull to side with the persecuted, be he right or wrong. Fortune can do no more for you: you must stand or fall by your present chance: if persecution will not popularize Ritualism, nothing will!”
Let me quote in conclusion the following sentence from an unpublished work – a Revised Version of the English Prayer Book. I entirely decline to say how I obtained it, and will merely remark that important documents sometimes see the light sooner than their authors intended:– Then again a barrier, so close (I think) to the end. --Lambiam 16:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! Thanks a lot! I was able to get the end of the letter, though there still is a gap: If these few words should cause even only one of the supporters of the Church Association to "take stock," and to cast a wary look around him before he again lends his voice to the insane cry of "Imprison them!" this little trumpet-blast will not have been blown in vain. – I am, Sir, your obedient servant, Lewis Carroll. December 24. (Date and name are actually on the same line, but I think transcribing it this way makes more sense.) --132.230.195.147 (talk) 18:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the last missing bit:

        Q. Will you reverently obey your Ordinary, and other chief ministers, unto whom is committed the charge and government over you, following with a glad mind and will their godly admonitions, and submitting yourself to their godly judgments?
        A. I will reverently obey them (when they order that which I desire to do); I will gladly follow their godly admonitions (when they admonish those who oppose me); and I will submit myself to their godly judgments (whensoever and wheresoever they will submit their godly judgments to me).
    If these few words ...

--Lambiam 14:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hi all, with nothing to do I was randomly scrolling through the Ref Desk pages, and came across the St James's Gazette. It was a pleasure (mea culpa) to attempt to enlarge the article from a stub, coming across so many well-known literary figures in the process. I also recently came across a mention of Alfred Harmsworth contributing aged 17-18 to the Gazette; is there any chance someone could also summarise Carroll's contributions (with dates, refs even? etc.), and I'll try to stick them both in. Well done with your impressive sleuthing, btw. Cheers, >MinorProphet (talk) 04:02, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's not easy to summarise more than 30 letters written under 3 different names during 10 years (Carroll more or less followed Greenwood from the Pall Mall Gazette to the St James's Gazette) on various topics, but Roger Lancelyn Green article "Lewis Carroll and the St. James's Gazette" in Notes and Queries, Volume 188, Issue 7, 7 April 1945 (https://academic.oup.com/nq/article/188/7/134/4180913) is a good start. There are some mistakes and omissions, though:

As you can see from above, the letter "Traitors in the Camp" (not named but mentioned by Green) is not about the same topic as "The Purity of Election". He misses two untitled letter from 23 March 1882 and 7 August 1884 about politics, the first signed "Lewis Carroll", the second "Dynamite". There was also another letter belonging to the "Proportionate Representation"/"Redistribution" letters, titled "Parliamentary Elections", 5 July 1884. Next came on 19 March 1885 "Vivisection Vivisected" (as all his other letters about vivisection under the name "Lewis Carroll").

The three children he wrote about in "Children in Theatres" weren't the Bowmans, and from the letter "What to Call a 'Telephone-Message'" Green misquotes Carroll's suggestion, it should be "teltale".

He (and most bibliographies) also miss three letters "To All Readers of 'Alice's Adventures Under Ground'", 13 December 1887, 11 December 1888, and 10 December 1889, as announced in the preface to "Alice's Adventures Under Ground".

The most important of these are certainly those about proportionate representation, published in the same year in enlarged form as The Principles of Parliamentary Representation. --132.230.195.148 (talk) 18:35, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]