Humanities desk
< February 16	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 18 >

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.

February 17

South Vietnamese claims on North Vietnam?

During its existence, did South Vietnam ever lay any territorial claims on North Vietnam? I know that North Vietnam obviously laid territorial claims on South Vietnam–hence its ultimately successful attempts to conquer it during the Vietnam War. However, what about the reverse? Futurist110 (talk) 00:38, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The nationalist independence movement, from its inception around the early 20th century, aspired independence of a unified country corresponding to present-day Vietnam. When independence was declared on 2 September 1945, it was for the whole territory. During the subsequent First Indochina War, France created a puppet state in 1949, the State of Vietnam, thereby partitioning the fledgling country. France lost control of its puppet state in 1955 after Ngô Đình Diệm took control and proclaimed the Republic of Vietnam. The nationalists, who had maintained control over the northern part, never gave up on the aspiration of a reunified Vietnam. It is difficult to draw a line between irredentism and reunification, but I doubt that "territorial claims" is the most appropriate label for the situation. Did West Germany have territorial claims on East Germany? --Lambiam 05:22, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, West Germany did have territorial claims on East Germany. Did South Vietnam actually have territorial claims on North Vietnam, though? Futurist110 (talk) 20:34, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Like many places, the history of Vietnam is complex and varied over its long history. Historically, the area had often been divided into two different states; pre-colonial times saw different states with a roughly north-south divide, while at various times the whole territory was united under one state, it was not often (or even common) to be so. North Vietnam was, at various times, under Chinese control as Chinese Annam, or as the independent or semi-independent states of Đàng Ngoài or Đại Việt (which also at times extended control over South Vietnam) while the south was largely controlled by the state of Champa, and populated by a different ethnic group known as the Chams, many of which over time either migrated or were assimilated into the Đại Việt people to form the modern Vietnamese people. Even the French divided the country into three different polities, Tonkin, Annam, and Cochinchina, and the three regions were further combined with Laos and Cambodia into a single administration, French Indochina. Vietnam had been united for much of the 19th century under the Nguyễn dynasty, however, the French had assisted the Dynasty in their rise to power (see French assistance to Nguyễn Ánh) and they used this as leverage to exert increasing control over Vietnam, by the late 19th century the Nguyễn emperors were largely French puppets and France had effectively divided the country again into multiple regions for administration. In the last 500 years, Vietnam has only been a united, independent state from about 1802-1887 and since 1976. --Jayron 32 13:31, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What was the situation before 1802 like? Futurist110 (talk) 20:34, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Basically three states, as shown at File:Vietnam at the end of 18th century (Vi).png, from north to south these were semi-independent kingdoms controlled by Quang Trung, Nguyễn Nhạc, and Gia Long from north to south. Gia Long was also known as Nguyễn Ánh and was the one to unify the country under one dynasty. --Jayron 32 13:03, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

War and Peace by Tolstoy

How many words in the original translation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.180.105.90 (talk) 08:52, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In what language? The first translation of War and Peace into English was by American Nathan Haskell Dole, in 1899. 41.165.67.114 (talk) 09:03, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You will find the answer if you Google "how many words in war and peace", or you can take a look at our article on List of longest novels.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:23, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Followup: The wiki article gives two numbers, which are the Dunnigan and Gifford/Maude translations, not the Dole translation. 49.180.105.90, if you need the number of words in Dole’s translation specifically, best I can suggest is something like downloading it from https://archive.org/stream/warandpeace01dolegoog/warandpeace01dolegoog_djvu.txt and https://archive.org/stream/warandpeace00dolegoog/warandpeace00dolegoog_djvu.txt, paste it into Word and use the word count feature. But you’d have to spend some time stripping out the google boilerplate and decide if you also want to strip out things like page numbers, chapter titles, chapter summaries, translator’s introduction, etc. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 16:29, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How do we read "49.180.105.90"? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:09, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Duh! Silly me. I thought you were telling us the number of pages, but you were addressing the unregistered OP. (Blush). -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:35, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It might be easier to count the pages and derive an average number of words per page for an approximation. Xuxl (talk) 22:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

However many words there are, it might be interesting to know how many were about War and how many were about Peace. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:55, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

George Alexander Smith, biologist

Can anyone kindly furnish biographical data for George Alexander Smith (d:Q105533228), who was "Appointed Boy Attendant in Zoology Department" of the British Museum (Natural History) in November 1896 (so born circa 1882?) and worked there until at least 1927? All we have so far are four papers he wrote, as listed in Wikispecies, and his NHM record. As always, a death date would enable us to determine the copyright status of his works. Did he serve in WWI? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:06, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Died May 19, 1933, aged 49, if this is him? snippet view result: “OBITUARIES: We regret to record the death, on 19th May, of Mr. George Alexander Smith, in his fiftieth year. Mr. Smith had been for thirty-five years on the staff of the Natural History Museum, London, and took part in the Training Course for Curators held last October.” 70.67.193.176 (talk) 16:44, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There’s also an obituary at [https://books.google.com/books?id=qyxEAAAAYAAJ&q=%22george+alexander+smith%22 – again snippet view only and I can’t see anything but his name and “Obituary” but perhaps WP:RX can get you the article. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 16:48, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nice finds, thank you - I've requested the latter, at RX. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:36, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Andy Mabbett - found by repeatedly Googling quotes from the snippet view of the Natural History Magazine:

"MR. G. A. Smith entered the service of the Trustees as a Boy Attendant in 1896. At first he worked with the late Professor Jeffrey Bell and one of his earliest tasks must have been to assist in removing the collection of Crustacea from the Old Spirit Building to what was then the "Challenger" Room in the basement of the East Wing and is now the Rock Room of the Mineral Department. When I first visited the Museum in 1898 this removal was still incomplete and Smith was busily engaged on it. At that time Professor Bell had under his charge a very varied assemblage of animal groups which are now cared for by some half - dozen Assistant Keepers , and it was while working with him that Smith acquired the interest in Echinoderma which he retained until the end of his life. In later years when that group of animals, together with the Annelids , was allocated to a single Assistant Keeper , who found his hands sufficiently full in the study of Polychaeta, Smith's knowledge of the Echinoderma was of great assistance and many overseas visitors have paid warm tribute to the help he gave them . Perhaps Smith's experiences in the War , when he served in the Royal Army Medical Corps, did a good deal towards developing the organizing capacity and power of taking responsibility which were afterwards shown when as Higher Grade Clerk he was put in charge of the Subordinate Staff in the New Spirit Building. In this position he was responsible for the ordering and distribution of bottles, spirit , and laboratory supplies , and also for a great amount of detail , principally in connexion with the supply of collectors' gear and the equipment of expeditions..."

I ran out of steam at that point. Alansplodge (talk) 23:28, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

THE LONDON GAZETTE, 10 DECEMBER, 1919 lists a Capt. George Alexander .Smith, M.C., 13th Fid. Amb., Can. A.M.C which seems to be the Canadian Army Medical Corps, so not sure if it's the same one.

Certainly not the same one is Captain George Alexander Smith MC, a Native American chief and father of Harry Jay Smith, aka Jay Silverheels, aka Tonto. :-) Alansplodge (talk) 23:46, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The full obituary has been found here (in a volume published in 1932, hence not found by searches limited to 1931 or 1933). This puts his death in 1932, not 1933. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:47, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great search work! Glad you found a copy. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 16:03, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Sorge's reburial

Per Richard Sorge#Death, "after hounding the American occupation authorities, Sorge's Japanese lover, Hanako Ishii" located his body, cremated it and eventually had his ashes interred at Tama Cemetery. Meanwhile Russian wikiarticle and some Russian sources, such as this, say that in 1967 American occupation authorities reburied him with military honors at that cemetery. But American occupation of Japan ended in 1952, so is that a fake or sort of a misrepresentation? Brandmeister^talk 19:01, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why the United States government would have wished to honor him in the first place. The U.S. occupation of the Ryukyu islands part of Japan continued until 1972, but that doesn't seem relevant. AnonMoos (talk) 06:08, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why was it called the Committee of Public Safety?

During the Reign of Terror, power in France was mostly held by the Committee of Public Safety (in French: "Comité de salut public"). What were the origins of this name? It's pretty clear that, at least by the height of the Reign of Terror, this Committee had fairly little to do with public safety. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 23:55, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The "public safety" was a reference to those who wanted to stop the French Revolution and to undo its achievements and accomplishments, no? Futurist110 (talk) 00:04, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I guess my struggle with the phrase is that the idea of a committee to address "public safety" sounds like one that's actually going to deal with safety, rather than generalized government. I'm just curious if there was a narrower mandate when this committee was originally named, or if the idea of it dealing with "public safety" was false from the beginning. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 03:35, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the logic was that the safety of the public would genuinely be threatened if the Ancien regime were to ever return to power and begin hunting down alleged revolutionaries, including among the general public? Futurist110 (talk) 05:20, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some similarity to the Anti-Fascist Protection Rampart and Vocational Education and Training Centers. If you're going to oppress people, at least some of them might be persuaded that it's for their own good. Alansplodge (talk) 12:15, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Such things are fairly dime a dozen IMO. E.g. the State Law and Order Restoration Council, later renamed the State Peace and Development Council. This time around, they went for the more bland State Administration Council. By a similar token, it's a classic meme that any country which see the need to add Democractic to their name probably isn't particularly democratic in the sense most people use it. (Political parties are a little different.) Nil Einne (talk) 14:08, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sense of French salut is more one of salvation than of safety, and public can mean "national". The committee was originally instituted, on 6 April 1793, to save France from imminent doom. It was the de facto government. --Lambiam 12:39, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, see this 1805 French-English dictionary which translates salut as "safety, welfare, life". The committee's name is sometimes translated as "Committee of Public Welfare". Surely it must owe something to the legal maxim salus populi [sometimes quoted as publica] suprema lex esto, "the good of the people should be the supreme law". --Antiquary (talk) 13:00, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Committee was not envisioned to be "the government" of France. The government at the time the Committee was created was the National Convention, and it had both executive and legislative powers. As legislative bodies do, it created a number of committees to handle various aspects of governance, and created two committees in 1792-1793: the Committee of General Security and the Committee of Public Safety. Most of the work of the Convention was on "protecting the revolution from its enemies" and it created a number of committees like this with generic names and ill-defined boundaries. It was never really clear (even at the time) what the difference between the two committees was beyond the concentration of political power in the hands of those who led them. The Committee of General Security already existed and was supposedly doing the job of rooting out enemies of the revolution and prosecuting them, but the Convention's leaders got freaked out by the surprise defection of General Dumouriez, and created a new committee to work alongside the Committee of General Security and supplement its work, which is why it was given the largely synonymous name of "Committee of Public Safety". So now France had two committees whose job it was to root out enemies of the revolution, and it's really the rivalry between the two groups that led to the Terror, as each committee sought to out do the other in defending the Revolution. General Security initially had the greater cache, with such leaders as Jean-Paul Marat and Jacques-Louis David on it. Public Safety's creation gave some of their rivals, initially Georges Danton, and more prominently later, Maximilien Robespierre, access to power as well. If you're not confused yet, you should be. Trying to understand the shifting allegiances and various internal divisions within the French Revolution is really Three-dimensional chess. I haven't even brought up groups like the Jacobins, the Girondins, the Montagnards, the Hébertists, the Dantonists, the Cordeliers, etc. etc. etc. The simplest way to answer "Why was it called "Public Safety"", the answer is "Because there was already a Committee of General Security, and they needed a similar name because they were doing the same thing" and the answer to "Why even have a new committee to do the same thing" is "because the people who created it wanted to tap in to some of the political power of the older committee". It's a giant mess when you really get into it. --Jayron 32 13:45, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
During the American Revolution, the colonies were run by Committees of safety as was England after Charles I (Committee of Safety (England)). It may just be the term of art. Rmhermen (talk) 00:48, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]