Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2023 February 28
| Humanities desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < February 27 | << Jan | February | Mar >> | March 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. |
February 28
editWhat was the best strategy for the Oklahoma land rush?
editWith 20/20 hindsight historians have probably figured out which strategies were the best for each budget and level of risk tolerance. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:51, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- It depends on one's values and objectives. For the objective of minimizing suffering, that of the Chickasaw was best, but at the cost of a certain loss of dignity compared to the Cherokee. --Lambiam 20:46, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- How many Sooners' objective was minimizing the suffering of natives? 136.56.52.157 (talk) 21:37, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Which strategy is best depends on one's objectives, not on their popularity. --Lambiam 10:02, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Their objective was surely to claim the best piece of land possible. Of course that depends on whether they are farmers, ranchers, miners, entrepreneurs, etc. 136.56.52.157 (talk) 21:24, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Which strategy is best depends on one's objectives, not on their popularity. --Lambiam 10:02, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- How many Sooners' objective was minimizing the suffering of natives? 136.56.52.157 (talk) 21:37, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- There were four Oklahoma land rushes: notably 1st in 1889 & 4th in 1893. The "best" strategy seems to have been different for each. During the Oklahoma Land Rush of 1889, those who snuck into the territory early concealed themselves in ravines and bushes and when the bugle sounded "seemed to rise right up out of the ground" to claim property.[1] The best strategy for the Oklahoma Land Rush of 1893 was to be first in line.[2] --136.56.52.157 (talk) 21:28, 28 February 2023 (UTC) (with a little help from Perplexity.ai)
We married under the joint estate rule
editI am watching the Maigret episode Maigret et la Grande Perche with Bruno Cremer and Michael Lonsdale. Lonsdale's character, the dentist, being questioned by Maigret (Cremer) about his second marriage (the police found no marriage licence when they searched his house) said "We married under the joint estate rule" (according to the subtitles). What is this rule? I must admit I know little about French marriage law, only that it is a secular institution. Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 22:13, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Maybe similar to community property? The words "joint estate" appear in the South Africa section of the Community property article. AnonMoos (talk) 04:11, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Indeed. Also called community of property, known as communauté de(s) biens in French before a new law took effect on 1 February 1966. Maigret wrote his works much earlier and used that term.[3] Also, in this context, "rule" is not a good translation of French régime. The sense in this context, for which English has no good equivalent, is more that of the type of marriage contract. It would have been better not to translate it but use "married in community of property", also used in the South Africa section of the article Community property. --Lambiam 08:06, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- This link to www.notaries.fr seems to go into sufficient detail. —Floquenbeam (talk) 04:17, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks all, I see that Maigret called it a marriage contract in the book, which makes more sense than licence. DuncanHill (talk) 13:02, 3 March 2023 (UTC)