Humanities desk
< May 18	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 20 >

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.

May 19[edit]

did Russia offered (or planned to offer) Liechtenstein, the state of Alaska?[edit]

id 122.59.57.169 (talk) 06:46, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you do a crude Google search, you can find this theory propounded on various unreliable sources in recent years. Every such website I have found is exceptionally weak, and the assertions posted on such websites are dubious and highly speculative. When I search Google Books and Google Scholar for anything about this, I come up empty-handed. Who knows? Maybe some Russian diplomat asked the royal family of Liechtenstein about buying Alaska and were told "no". After all, why would a tiny landlocked nation without a navy, whose current population is less than 39,000, want to govern a gigantic territory 7,600 kilometers away whose only known source of income at that time was sea otter and sea lion pelts? The Russians who had vast experience operating in Siberia and the North Pacific waters were unable to make money in Alaska. Why would anyone think that a miniscule European country half a world away could run that business any better? The whole thing is highly dubious. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Cullen328 (talk) 07:18, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Any substantive factual basis for the claim would have an equally substantive curiosity value, so in that case we would see an abundance of references in reliable sources to such a refused offer, just like there is no lack of sources^[1] for the Alaska Purchase. The absence of references in reliable sources implies the absence of a factual basis. --Lambiam 08:21, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The most promising, but still rather weak, reference that I've found is this 2018 article from Liechtenstein newspaper Liechtensteiner Vaterland. The title read "It is certainly not a rumour" (a quote), the lead is "In a letter, Prince Hans-Adam II. confirms an offer from the Russian tsar to the princely house of Liechtenstein to buy Alaska. He is not surprised by the lack of a written document." The article itself requires registration. --Wrongfilter (talk) 09:48, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the tsar had a sense of humor. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:36, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wild speculation, but maybe it would have been a deal whereby Liechtenstein would acts as an intermediary to transfer the territory to another major power? Russia sells Alaska to Liechtenstein, then after a very short period Liechtenstein sells it to country X. Russia could then deny having ceded this strategic area to Country X, a move that might have caused negative reaction among other powers with interests in the region? --Soman (talk) 14:55, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article refers to a letter sent by the Prince to the Volksblatt, which can be read here. --Lambiam 18:54, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this happened at all, it wouldn't have had anything to do with the place we call Liechtenstein today. The House of Liechtenstein was based near Vienna and ruled over lands that are now in Austria, the Czech Republic, and Poland. The territory of Liechtenstein was a formality that allowed the prince to have a seat in the Imperial Diet (Holy Roman Empire), but it didn't have any great economic or practical importance, and the princes seldom if ever set foot in it. Some of the princes such as Johann I Joseph, Prince of Liechtenstein were allies of Russia in the Napoleonic wars. So any such deal would have been to sell Alaska to the wealthy family to add to its large holdings, and not to connect Alaska to the territory of Liechtenstein itself. --Amble (talk) 18:20, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to the letter by Prince Hans-Adam II, the offer was not to the principality, but to the House of Liechtenstein. He remembers that this offer was repeatedly discussed in the family. Note however that the offer, if real, must have been extended prior to the Alaska purchase of 1867. The Prince was born in 1945, so it is quite unlikely that any of the family members discussing this had direct knowledge of the offer. No documentary evidence exists in the family archives, which the Prince ascribes to the loss of significant parts of the archives at the end of the WWII; part was burned and part was taken by the Soviets. --Lambiam 19:36, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which of Max Pemberton's mystery challenges were taken up?[edit]

The novelist Max Pemberton (1863–1950) created a challenge for G. K. Chesterton. Pemberton wrote an unfinished murder mystery, and Chesterton then responded by writing the resolution as determined by his fictional detective Father Brown.

Apparently, Pemberton set several of these "challenges" for famous mystery authors: my Father Brown collection's introduction mentions that he also set challenges for Arthur Conan Doyle (Sherlock Holmes) and Baroness Orczy (The Old Man in the Corner). Were those, or any other of his challenges, taken up? If so, in which publications can I find them? Equinox ◑ 13:58, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

St. Louis, Missouri - Union or Confedrate?[edit]

Was the city of St. Louis in Missouri a Union or Confedrate state during the Civil War? 86.130.77.121 (talk) 18:14, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Union. See St. Louis in the American Civil War#Civil War. Alansplodge (talk) 18:33, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as a city and not a state, it didn't have the status necessary to be anything during the civil war except what Missouri was. Missouri in the American Civil War was what is normally called a "Border State" euphemistically, which means that it was a slave-holding state that remained in the Union. Missouri is more complicated than some of the other such border states, as Missourians went and got themselves a second government, which while it lacked any real functional control over much of Missouri at any given time, they were so recognized by the Confederate States of America, and they sent representatives to the Confederate States Congress, see 1st Confederate States Congress and 2nd Confederate States Congress, which lists them. Missouri's confederate representatives continued to represent the whole state, and so technically, one of those representatives was elected to represent the district that contained St. Louis. In a practical sense, Missouri was still mostly a Union state, but it could be argued that it was both. --Jayron 32 18:50, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, thanks for the correction. The question is somewhat ambiguous. Alansplodge (talk) 22:14, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the Little House on the Prairie season 4 episode The Inheritance, a lawyer from St Louis had a box containing Confederate money. 86.130.77.121 (talk) 18:30, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps that could be added to pur article as a Reliable Source ;-) Alansplodge (talk) 23:40, 20 May 2023 (UTC)}}[reply]