Humanities desk
< September 30	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 2 >

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.

October 1[edit]

Colors of Women's Suffrage[edit]

In the United Kingdom, the colors for Women's Suffrage were purple, white and green. But in the United States of America, the colors for that cause were purple, white and yellow. What were the colors for the cause in Canada?142.255.72.126 (talk) 03:15, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At the Wikipedia article titled Women's suffrage in Canada, it notes yellow was used as the symbolic color of the movement starting in the 1890s. --Jayron 32 11:35, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2016 United States presidential election[edit]

Hi. I am a user from the German Wikipedia. Recently, I remembered a moment in the run-up to the 2016 United States presidential election. A video had been leaked from a meeting of the Republican Committee or Republican Party in an unincorporated territory of the United States (maybe American Samoa or US Virgin Islands?). One guy (the regional leader?) railed against the nationwide course of the party which was about to elect Trump as its candidate. Maybe the meeting happened after the nomination. I am not sure about that anymore. My question is: Does anyone remember the scene and could jog my memory? What was the name of that particular speaker? Best regards --Florean Fortescue (talk) 06:20, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Republican establishment was quite horrified at first by the idea of Trump winning the nomination. They got behind him only after they saw his popularity with voters. They originally had Jeb Bush positioned as their anointed and inevitable nominee. Bush raised far more money than anyone else before the primaries started, but his campaign crashed and burned almost right away. So Trump won the nomination despite the rest of the party's earlier misgivings.

Anyway, I don't recognize the specific video you're thinking of, but in the early part of the primary season I'm sure there were a lot like it, just like the Democratic party establishment was terrified (in both 2016 and 2020) of Bernie Sanders. To the Republican party's credit, aside from just complaining about Trump, they didn't try to manipulate their nomination process as far as I can tell. The Democrats tilted their primaries by having their superdelegates endorse Hillary Clinton early on, playing various games with debate schedules, etc. The Republicans didn't have superdelegates and instead let their voters pick their nominee, making them more democratic than the Democrats.

Trump is of course terrible as a politician (Clinton and Biden are also terrible) but he was quite an effective campaigner in 2016. So from the standpoint of wanting a candidate who could win the election for the party, the Republican primary voters (who picked Trump) showed better judgment than the establishment (who wanted Bush). Clinton spent twice as much money as Trump in the general election and still managed to lose. That took real skill. Clinton wrote a self-serving book afterwards about it, What Happened (Clinton book). There was a joke at the time that the book cover answers its own question. 2601:648:8202:96B0:0:0:0:DDAF (talk) 19:34, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This youtube search might give you some interesting viewing, though it doesn't show anything about Virgin Islands or American Samoa. I tried a few other searches with those terms and didn't see anything fitting your description either, but maybe with more persistence you can find the one you are thinking of. 2601:648:8202:96B0:0:0:0:DDAF (talk) 20:01, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you so far. I will keep on looking. --Florean Fortescue (talk) 12:46, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

White-blue-red tricolor[edit]

Russia uses the plain tricolor, while those of Slovenia and Slovakia also feature their coats of arms. But both Slovenia and Slovakia have historically used the plain tricolor too. So when those countries became independent in the early 90s, did Slovenia and Slovakia tried to claim the plain tricolor first? In fact it seems that Slovenia adopted its official flag a couple of months before Russia in 1991. Why did they miss this opportunity? Articles: Flag of Russia, Flag of Slovenia, Flag of Slovakia. --Qnowledge (talk) 14:25, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no rule about what a flag can look like, and countries can have identical flags. Consider Flag of Chad and Flag of Romania, or Flag of Indonesia and Flag of Monaco, or Flag of Luxembourg and Flag of the Netherlands. Also, maybe Slovenia and Slovakia didn't want to have a plain tricolor. --Jayron 32 15:06, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Russia says that the tricolor has been used since at least 1700 (earlier by some accounts). The other two are from 1848. Slovakia has recently added its coat of arms to avoid confusion. Alansplodge (talk) 15:27, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also Haiti chose Liechtenstein's flag without realizing and Liechtenstein added a coat when they found out. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:52, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There was already a movement in the Russian Republic, when it was still part of the USSR, to adopt the traditional tri-color flag to replace its communist-inspired one following the 1990 Russian Supreme Soviet election. It was used prominently by opponents of communism in 1990-1991, before either Czechoslovakia or Yugoslavia broke up. Slovenian and Slovakian nationalists were well aware of that and designed their own flags with distinctive features. Xuxl (talk) 20:19, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Most Slavic nations have flags based on the Flag of Russia. See Pan-Slavic colors for details. Ghirla^-трёп- 12:35, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The surname of the Belgian royal family is once more Saxe-Coburg and Gotha?[edit]

Due to today's court ruling, Delphine Boël has been legally elevated from a noble jonkvrouw to Her Royal Highness Princess Delphine of Belgium and her children are now Prince/Princess of Belgium as well. As widely cited in new sources covering this development, she also now has the surname Saxe-Cobourg-Gotha. The family name of the Belgian royal family used to be Saxe-Coburg and Gotha before it was changed to "of Belgium" in 1921 due to its German connection in the aftermath of the First World War. All Belgian royals also used to have the titles Princes/Princess of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and Duke/Duchess of Saxony before they were similarly dropped in 1921. Now, however, it seems that together with the new 2015 limitation of the title of Prince/Princess of Belgium to children and grandchildren of the monarch and heir apparent, the old surname and those titles have been revived as well for all descendants of Leopold I with the exception of Princess Astrid's Austria-Este children. I cannot read French very well. So, could someone confirm the information in this article from French Wikipedia for me? StellarHalo (talk) 23:21, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, have translated the paragraph above the one you linked to, as it seems more informative. (This one.) “According to the 2017 edition of the Carnet Mondain (which reproduces data about the Belgian royal family as released by the Palace), the old titles of prince or princess of Saxe-Cobourg-Gotha and of duke or duchess of Saxony, which were abandoned after the First World War, are used for the descendants of Leopold I (with the exception of the children and grandchildren of Astrid and Lorenz). Princes and princesses born after 2015 and who do not have the right to the title of prince or princess of Belgium (due to the reform of 2015) receive solely the titles of prince or princess of Saxe-Cobourg-Gotha and of duke or duchess of Saxony.” 70.67.193.176 (talk) 01:57, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pennant flown by USS President in this image[edit]

I'm trying to identify the pennant being flown by USS President in this image. It seems to be devoid of any red, which is not what I would expect. Was this the actual one used on the ship, or did the artist fabricate it for the painting? --Puzzledvegetable^{Is it teatime already?} 23:55, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Me again. We also have this:

I'm not sure why what is purportedly the same image would have different colors, but in this one, the pennant appears with a somewhat more conventional color scheme. Which one was actually used on the President? --Puzzledvegetable^{Is it teatime already?} 00:03, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These look like different prints of the same engraving.

You probably shouldn't put too much weight on the colors, it's pretty common for engravings to be colored by someone other than the original artist. Especially older ones that would have to be colored individually by hand.

here is a discussion on the topic. ApLundell (talk) 01:18, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do we know what the pennant of the President actually looked like? --Puzzledvegetable^{Is it teatime already?} 01:21, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be a commissioning pennant, the modern version is shown here (fourth one down). Alansplodge (talk) 08:01, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Earlier American commissioning pennants bore 13 white stars in their blue hoist". Naval History and Heritage Command - Commissioning Pennant. Alansplodge (talk) 08:07, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Little Belt affair and [1] have Commodore John Rodgers, so a broad pennant, see PRESIDENT vs. LITTLE BELT. fiveby(zero) 13:57, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lossing, Benson John (1896). The pictorial field-book of the war of 1812. pp. 181–2. with the commodore's broad pennant flying, denoting that he was on board...at two o'clock displayed her broad pennant can't find much about the 15 star pennant, here's a FOTW image. fiveby(zero) 14:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That seems much more likely; a commodore's broad pennant lacks the long streamer shown in the OP's image, I suspect artistic licence is at play there. Alansplodge (talk) 15:27, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]