Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2016 December 31

= December 31 =

Anti-American Revolution
Are there any movies, television show or books which portrays the American Revolution in a negative light and the British in a positive light?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:54, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The most recent bestseller that comes to mind is The Book of Negroes (novel) and its associated miniseries. The term you may want to search for is "Loyalist"; we have plenty of articles about them. Here's "the first book-length investigation of the literature written by loyalists during the revolutionary period" (review Cambridge 2014, of book Oxford 2013). Carbon Caryatid (talk) 13:33, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The Sergeant Lamb novels by Robert Graves show the American Revolution from the point of view of a British soldier serving in that war. Naturally, he's none too sympathetic to the American cause. --Antiquary (talk) 17:44, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * It looks like The Fort by Bernard Cornwell and several of Kenneth Roberts' novels might also fit the bill, but I've read none of them and can't say for sure. --Antiquary (talk) 18:32, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The Scarlet Coat (1955) has the British officer John André as hero. Tevildo (talk) 19:30, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * "Those Damned Rebels: The American Revolution As Seen Through British Eyes" by Michael Pearson is a historical account of the American Revolution that I found informative.--Wikimedes (talk) 22:01, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * One of the early Fox books by Adam Hardy (a pen name for Kenneth Bulmer) portraits part of the revolutionary war through the eyes of a member of the British Navy. Sorry, I only inherited the German editions, and even those are 600 km away, so no details. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 06:56, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Benjamin Grierson
After the Civil War his only pedigree or credentials was attacking inocent children. Not only have I never found that line to be true but it is contrary to the rest of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quillrun (talk • contribs) 04:10, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * There was a bunch of vandalism by an anonymous IP — I've reverted to the last good version. Thank you for reporting this here! NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:14, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

political violence and not terrorism
(Originally posted and moved from here by me. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 17:25, 31 December 2016 (UTC))

Hi I am a new user as well. My question is why is this defined as political violence and not terrorism? Isn't political violence by definition terrorism?

ter·ror·ism

ˈterəˌrizəm/Submit

noun

the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

Source:https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome-psyapi2&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8&q=definition%20terrorism&oq=definition%20terrorism&rlz=1CAASUA_enUS719US719&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.3895j0j7 --Wimp35 (talk) 18:29, 30 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Our Terrorism article discusses the difficulty of defining the word - there is no clear answer. Alansplodge (talk) 18:40, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Or perhaps even more specific, see Definitions of terrorism. Note the plural - there is no universal definition. Eliyohub (talk) 20:24, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Possibly related... if considering referring to someone in a Wikipedia article as a terrorist, see Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch Eliyohub (talk) 22:27, 4 January 2017 (UTC)