Humanities desk
< July 2	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 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.

July 3

Formally entitled "dictator"

Aside from Roman dictators, how many governments have formally been entitled "dictatorship" (either in English or its equivalent in another language), and/or how many government officials have formally held the title of "dictator"? Dictator#Modern usage in formal titles mentions three examples, but I'm unclear whether this is exhaustive, or if they're just three random examples. Of course, keyword searches are extremely difficult, since "dictator" is a title informally applied to many government leaders. Nyttend (talk) 00:38, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The 1920s/1930s trend of supreme leader titles wasn't based on the literal word "dictator", but it didn't do much to veil the autocratic reality either: duce (Italian) / conducator (Romanian) / fuehrer (German) / caudillo (Spanish). In Lebanon, Antoun Saadeh imitated this trend with the Arabic word za`im, and no doubt there were others... AnonMoos (talk) 03:02, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Prefix search also turns up Dictator Executive Commission in Warsaw and Centrocaspian Dictatorship... AnonMoos (talk) 04:05, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also the Despotate of Epirus (with a separate Despot of Epirus page just for the title)... AnonMoos (talk) 07:14, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note that "despot", in that historical context, has nothing of the implicit meaning of that term in modern English. It simply means "lord"/"ruler". "Despotate" is no more equivalent to "dictatorship" than any other medieval title such as "lordship", "duchy" or "kingdom". Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:53, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know almost nothing about medieval Greek, but in ancient Greek, both the words Δεσποτης and Δεσποτικος sometimes had negative connotations when used in a political sense... AnonMoos (talk) 21:02, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Communist governments have commonly claimed the mantle of the Dictatorship of the proletariat, constituting control of society led by the mass of working people without significant property or capital who need to sell their labor day-to-day in order to survive. In practice, this has usually been expressed as a dictatorship of Communist elites, brutally led by people like Joseph Stalin. Cullen328 (talk) 07:29, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

True, but their officials haven't been entitled "Dictator", and the dictatorship of the proletariat is a philosophy, not the official name of the state. One may similarly speak of Communist despots, but there's similarly no Despotate of Communist Place as there was a Despotate of the Morea. Nyttend (talk) 08:45, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The OED says "Equivalents of dictator in other languages were sometimes used during the 19th cent. and later in the formal titles of heads of state, and the English word has been used to render these; more generally, however, the word suggests oppressive or totalitarian rule, and hence is rarely used in a neutral sense" but alas it does not give us examples. DuncanHill (talk) 10:07, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Banned user
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
See benevolent dictatorship. 2A02:C7B:208:F300:29DA:3E43:4852:DE0E (talk) 10:35, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but again, not many of them have used "dictator"-or-its-translations as their formal titles. Nyttend (talk) 21:26, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistically, “Dictator” means “Speaker”… so I suppose one could say that the office of “Speaker of the House” would fit the question asked. Of course the connotations are VERY different. Blueboar (talk) 11:17, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Of course a man who uses his Dictaphone is also a dictator. DuncanHill (talk) 11:40, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's a different meaning; it's simply one who speaks what's already been done (whether speaking for an assembly or reciting the law), while "dictator" is someone who speaks to rule by himself. Nyttend (talk) 21:26, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OED - "classical Latin dictātor magistrate having plenary powers, appointed at Rome in times of emergency, Italian municipal officer, in post-classical Latin also person who dictates to a writer (late 4th cent.), author, writer (6th cent.)" DuncanHill (talk) 21:33, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After having been appointed Dictador Supremo de la República del Paraguay by the Congress of Paraguay in 1814, originally thought to be a temporal position, José Gaspar Rodríguez de Francia was also appointed Dictador Perpetuo de la República del Paraguay in 1816. He held both titles, styled in merged form as Dictador Supremo y Perpetuo de la República del Paraguay, until his death in 1840. --Lambiam 13:56, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Leaders of the Polish anti-Russian uprisings of 1830 and 1863 used "dyktator powstania" ("dictator of the uprising") as their official title. The native Polish word "naczelnik" has a similar sense and was used by Tadeusz Kościuszko (leader of the uprising of 1794) and by Józef Piłsudski (after Poland regained independence in 1918). — Kpalion^(talk) 10:15, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They were not government officials, though. See also Benevolent dictator for life, a title likewise not bestowed on government officials. --Lambiam 10:20, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they were. They set up temporary governments and wielded actual executive power while the uprisings lasted. — Kpalion^(talk) 10:26, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My point goes along with Kralion's thinking — they tried to set up governments and claimed the title "dictator". Many people called "dictators" maintain a façade of not being dictators, e.g. Stalinist governments are pure democracies on paper (cf. Elections in North Korea), so it's not entirely neutral to call Josef Stalin or Kim Jong Un a dictator. Conversely, because these individuals claimed and used the title of "dictator", it's completely neutral to call them dictators. Nyttend (talk) 23:46, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Law, Lloyd George, and dictatorship

Our article David Lloyd George contains a quotation from Bonar Law, "He can be dictator for life if he wishes", dated to 1918 and sourced to a 2011 magazine article by Vernon Bogdanor. Can anyone help me find an earlier source for it? It's not in the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations, nor yet in Brack and Ingham's Dictionary of Liberal Quotations. Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 10:05, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In this book The Decline and Fall of Lloyd George I found Had not Bonar Law himself declared a short while before that Lloyd George, if he wanted to, could be Prime Minister for life? - which obviously isn't good enough to pinpoint the quote, but might suggest that it didn't really originally include "dictator". The context of "a short while before" seems to be the 1918 United Kingdom general election. Card Zero (talk) 10:23, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That does sound more familiar. DuncanHill (talk) 10:34, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a book Fatal influence: the impact of Ireland on British Politics which has an entire chapter about Lloyd George titled "Prime Minister for Life". By common consent, the victory belonged to one man — Lloyd George, and to him, alone. These were the new realities that prompted Bonar Law to make his remarkable observation about a man who, in the past, had been his opponent but who was now his partner. Surveying this radically changed, this ironically changed, political landscape, Bonar Law said of Lloyd George: “He can be Prime Minister for life if he likes”. This seems to place the quote after the election. There's a footnote which cites Lord Beaverbrook, Men and Power: 1917-1918 (New York 1956), p. 325. Card Zero (talk) 10:54, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article in a 1952 number of The Listener, of which Google Books only gives a snippet view, includes this passage:

When I declared in print: Lloyd George must go if he refuses to fulfill his promises of Empire freedom in trade – Bonar Law assured me "Lloyd George can be Prime Minister for life if he wants to". Bonar Law was wrong. Within two years, the Tory leader was compelled to break and crush Lloyd George, not only in parliament, but in the polls too.

Elsewhere in the article the author says that he himself was "Canadian Government representative to the Army of Canada serving overseas, and also a member of the British House of Commons". That sounds like only one man to me. Can we, just between ourselves, conclude that the remark was made to Beaverbook himself, even though in the 1956 book he doesn't mention that? --Antiquary (talk) 12:13, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From the snippets I've been able to extract the article appears to be a review by Beaverbrook of The History of The Times, in the form of Beaverbrook explaining how he was always right and honest and honourable and everybody else were schemers and shysters and liars. Beaverbrook wasn't above claiming to have been involved in conversations that he wasn't present for, so I would be wary of saying that Law said it to him without third-party confirmation. DuncanHill (talk) 12:29, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Mary Had a Little Lamb" vs. "Merrily We Roll Along"

Why do piano lessons books often teach children the tune of "Mary Had a Little Lamb" (even if that's what the children know the tune technically is) as "Merrily We Roll Along"?? (Interestingly enough, Wikipedia itself reveals there's a song with the latter title, but it clearly isn't the same song at all; the song piano lessons books teach children when they teach children the tune of "Mary Had a Little Lamb" is clearly a song that goes:

Merrily we roll along
Roll along, roll along
Merrily we roll along
O'er the deep blue sea

...which clearly isn't the song Wikipedia's article is about. (Please keep in mind that what I want to know is why "Merrily We Roll Along" is a lyric favored over "Mary Had a Little Lamb" in piano lessons books.) Georgia guy (talk) 17:57, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please give evidence for your unsupported claim that "Merrily We Roll Along" is favoured over "Mary Had a Little Lamb" in piano lesson books. --Viennese Waltz 19:33, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Experience. Georgia guy (talk) 19:41, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's not evidence. --Viennese Waltz 09:19, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We have articles Mary Had a Little Lamb and Merrily We Roll Along (song) and Goodnight, Ladies. DuncanHill (talk) 19:55, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The children's song originated as the chorus of Goodnight, Ladies. --Lambiam 21:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Mary Had a Little Lamb needs some changes if someone who reads music could confirm. According to JSTOR 40214696 the 1830 Lowell Mason "Mary's Lamb" is a different tune. "Mary Had a Little Lamb" in Carmina Collegensia ~~1876~~1868 was apparently the first setting to "Goodnight, Ladies" and with the repetition in the lyrics. fiveby(zero) 21:10, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I went to the URL and it revealed that originally the song (in 1876) was a medley of its melody familiar today and a tune that is now "The Old Gray Mare". Georgia guy (talk) 21:47, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

oops, first edition of Carmina Collegensia was 1868, a year after "Goodnight, Ladies" first printed 1867, sung by Yale Yachting Club?[1] fiveby(zero) 22:08, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article The Old Gray Mare. DuncanHill (talk) 21:50, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know. Please compare its tune with the second part of the melody the URL Fiveby showed. Georgia guy (talk) 21:51, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reminds me a little of The Boy I Love is Up in the Gallery. DuncanHill (talk) 22:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are two s different "Merrily we roll along..." songs. Maybe a disambiguation page is needed. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:12, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So Mason's melody is not that of the MHaLL we know; it does not even resemble it. The current melody is sung to lyrics with plenty of repetitions ("Mary had a little lamb / Little lamb, little lamb / Mary had a little lamb") not found in the original poem and also not in Mason's setting. Can we conclude, with the author of the Western Folklore article on JSTOR, that the current melody was copied from Christy's song? --Lambiam 23:11, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here are "Good Night" in Carmina Yalensia 1867 and "Farewell Ladies" undated but attributed to Christy if they help. Horace Reynolds the author of the 1952 Christian Science Monitor article does say For reasons which I won't go into here, I think that “Good-Night, Ladies” was the first, and “Mary’s Lamb” the second, setting of this now well-known air. But where did the Yale boys of the 1860's get the air? and suggests there was probably earlier sheet music now lost. He also hints at a possible answer for Georgia guy with This setting [Mason's], now traditional in England, is not the setting which is traditional on this side of the Atlantic... fiveby(zero) 12:20, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lester S. Levy says 1843 for "Farewell Ladies", don't know if that's helpful, i've been lost as to which 'air' since "The Old Gray Mare" was mentioned. fiveby(zero) 13:25, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The words of "Mary Had a Little Lamb" were written in 1830, according to The Oxford Dictionary of Nursery Rhymes pp. 299-300, by Iona and Peter Opie (Archive.org., free registration needed). Plus lots of interesting info. MinorProphet (talk) 21:19, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From my 1960s London childhood, I can only recall it as a spoken rhyme. Alansplodge (talk) 20:07, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]