Odd Parts of History

[True Europa State]

One thing I find a bit odd is how Canadians were apparently incredibly ruthless during WW1. I don’t see much of a reason for why they were ruthless, but a story includes Canadians giving the Germans canned food. After requests for more canned food, they threw grenades.

Source: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/th ... -great-war

[Oateria]

One thing I find a bit odd is how Canadians were apparently incredibly ruthless during WW1. I don’t see much of a reason for why they were ruthless, but a story includes Canadians giving the Germans canned food. After requests for more canned food, they threw grenades.

Source: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/th ... -great-war

that's why they say sorry all the time, they feel bad about it

[Bears Armed]

Cum non solum. Get your mind out of the gutter, it was a letter from Pope Innocent IV to Güyük Khan which asked to please stop killing tons of Christians and suggested he could convert to Catholicism. It was a pretty muddled in translation and detached from context, however, and likely read more like the Pope was a small-time regional emperor, in Europe and simply of the Christian faith, who was asking the incredibly powerful and distant Mongol Empire to become his vassal.

Güyük Khan replied by saying the Mongols derived power from their divine mandate bestowed by God, and the whole burning down cities and massacres of entire populations was the punishment for not accepting this. He also demanded the Pope and his lords bow down to the Khanate and join its European holdings, or face complete and utter destruction. Needless to say, the incident didn’t really have any long term impact, but a Catholic Khanate was, at one point, not a wholly ridiculous idea.

Talking of popes...

On November 2nd 1889 President Benjamin Harrison signed the proclamation admitting North and South Dakota to the Union.

The fierce rivalry between them presented a dilemma as to which to admit first. Harrison ordered Secretary of State James Blaine to shuffle the papers and obscure from him which one he was signing first. The actual order was unrecorded thus it remains an enigma which Dakota was admitted first.

The origiinal separation between them had taken place because their inhabitants couldn't agree about which of two 'cities' would be the capital and splitting let both of those settlements enjoy that status (albeit, therefore, each only for half -- rather than all -- of Dakota).

[Hannoura Az-Zengi]

The WW1 Reich sent troops to afghanistan to convince the tribes to attack Britain.They got bored and brewed alcohol. That's bad to do in Afghanistan.

[Mtwara]

During WW2, drawings for British machines - to be manufactured in the USA as part of lend-lease - all had to be redone from first-angle projection to third-angle projection; I understand that this took a few years to finish.

[The Archregimancy]

The WW1 Reich sent troops to afghanistan to convince the tribes to attack Britain.They got bored and brewed alcohol. That's bad to do in Afghanistan.

This is a wild misrepresentation of events.

A simple check of a map will demonstrate that the German Empire (as was) couldn't have 'sent troops' to Afghanistan; those troops would have had to have passed through either A) the Russian Empire (at war with Germany until late 1917), B) British India (at war with Germany for the duration), or C) Persia / Iran (mostly divided at this point into Russian and British spheres of influence).

What you actually seem to be referring to is the Niedermayer–Hentig Expedition of 1915-16. This was a joint German-Ottoman diplomatic mission supported by Indian nationalists that was indeed designed to convince Afghanistan to distance itself from the British Empire and attack British India, but it wasn't 'troops' except insofar as Oskar von Niedermayer and Werner Otto von Hentig were army officers. It passed through Persia, splitting itself up so as to minimise the chances of capture. While the British took the expedition seriously, and both Russian and British security forces attempted to intercept the mission, they managed to slip through the security cordon and enter Afghanistan.

The mission didn't fail because Niedermayer and Hentig started brewing alcohol. At one point they were successful in writing a draft of an Afghan-German treaty, but it collapsed on the basis of a combination of: clever playing off of different factions by the Afghan Emir Habibullah Khan, who realised there was no prospect of Germany following through on its commitments unless they were obviously winning the war; 2) the clear inability of Germany or the Ottoman Empire to send through the requested 20,000 troops to defend Afghanistan's border with Russia during any invasion of British India; 3) concerted British counter-espionage and diplomatic pressure; and 4) Central Powers setbacks in the Arabian Peninsula and Caucasus Campaign that made it obvious that no direct military help would be forthcoming.

The Germans left Kabul in the summer of 1916 once it was clear they wouldn't be successful in achieving their goals; alcohol had nothing to do with it.

[Nlarhyalo]

On November 2nd 1889 President Benjamin Harrison signed the proclamation admitting North and South Dakota to the Union.

The fierce rivalry between them presented a dilemma as to which to admit first. Harrison ordered Secretary of State James Blaine to shuffle the papers and obscure from him which one he was signing first. The actual order was unrecorded thus it remains an enigma which Dakota was admitted first.

The origiinal separation between them had taken place because their inhabitants couldn't agree about which of two 'cities' would be the capital and splitting let both of those settlements enjoy that status (albeit, therefore, each only for half -- rather than all -- of Dakota).

The territorial capital was in Yankton (now far southeastern South Dakota) until 1883. The size and difficulty of travel in the late 1800s in the territory brought a push to move the capital to a more centralized location. The difficulty in travel was further heightened by rail development, Yankton was connected to the national rail network via Omaha while the largest settlement in the north (Fargo) was connected to Minneapolis/St. Paul; so to travel between the areas of the territory you either had to go the old-fashioned way by horseback or detour through Nebraska/Iowa/Minnesota.

Despite having 3/4 of the territory's population, the southerners were unable to come to a consensus on a new capital city while the northerns were and in 1883 the territorial governor moved the capital from Yankton to Bismarck (it is claimed he did this in part because he held investments in the railway company that was building a line out to Bismarck). This move was so unpopular in the south that they held a convention where they voted for statehood for the territory south of the 46th parallel. After some political squabbling (which included an unpopular federal government proposal to split the territory east/west at the Missouri River), the Dakotas were admitted separately in 1889. The earlier-mentioned inability of South Dakotans to agree on a capital led to an acrimonious election in 1890 to decide between Huron and Pierre as the state capital. Pierre won out due to its closer location to the Black Hills (the center of a gold rush at the time), although Huron remains the larger city today.

Another somewhat-related interesting fact is that due to a surveying error in 1863/64 when the western parts of Dakota Territory (which then went as far west at the continental divide) were being reorganized into Idaho Territory, 11 square miles of (still-uninhabited) land at the current Idaho/Montana/Wyoming triple point were not transferred and legally remained part of Dakota Territory. This error was unnoticed for about 10 years, but was corrected when Montana Territory was created from eastern Idaho Territory in 1873 and the land was transferred to Montana.

[Kerwa]

During WW2, drawings for British machines - to be manufactured in the USA as part of lend-lease - all had to be redone from first-angle projection to third-angle projection; I understand that this took a few years to finish.

I remember being told that Britain and Australia changed during WWII, I didn’t realize it was such an effort.

First angle does my head in anyway, no-one should use it in the first place.

[Hannoura Az-Zengi]

The WW1 Reich sent troops to afghanistan to convince the tribes to attack Britain.They got bored and brewed alcohol. That's bad to do in Afghanistan.

This is a wild misrepresentation of events.

A simple check of a map will demonstrate that the German Empire (as was) couldn't have 'sent troops' to Afghanistan; those troops would have had to have passed through either A) the Russian Empire (at war with Germany until late 1917), B) British India (at war with Germany for the duration), or C) Persia / Iran (mostly divided at this point into Russian and British spheres of influence).

What you actually seem to be referring to is the Niedermayer–Hentig Expedition of 1915-16. This was a joint German-Ottoman diplomatic mission supported by Indian nationalists that was indeed designed to convince Afghanistan to distance itself from the British Empire and attack British India, but it wasn't 'troops' except insofar as Oskar von Niedermayer and Werner Otto von Hentig were army officers. It passed through Persia, splitting itself up so as to minimise the chances of capture. While the British took the expedition seriously, and both Russian and British security forces attempted to intercept the mission, they managed to slip through the security cordon and enter Afghanistan.

The mission didn't fail because Niedermayer and Hentig started brewing alcohol. At one point they were successful in writing a draft of an Afghan-German treaty, but it collapsed on the basis of a combination of: clever playing off of different factions by the Afghan Emir Habibullah Khan, who realised there was no prospect of Germany following through on its commitments unless they were obviously winning the war; 2) the clear inability of Germany or the Ottoman Empire to send through the requested 20,000 troops to defend Afghanistan's border with Russia during any invasion of British India; 3) concerted British counter-espionage and diplomatic pressure; and 4) Central Powers setbacks in the Arabian Peninsula and Caucasus Campaign that made it obvious that no direct military help would be forthcoming.

The Germans left Kabul in the summer of 1916 once it was clear they wouldn't be successful in achieving their goals; alcohol had nothing to do with it.

I gotta stop trusting Oversimplified lol

[The Archregimancy]

This is a wild misrepresentation of events.

A simple check of a map will demonstrate that the German Empire (as was) couldn't have 'sent troops' to Afghanistan; those troops would have had to have passed through either A) the Russian Empire (at war with Germany until late 1917), B) British India (at war with Germany for the duration), or C) Persia / Iran (mostly divided at this point into Russian and British spheres of influence).

What you actually seem to be referring to is the Niedermayer–Hentig Expedition of 1915-16. This was a joint German-Ottoman diplomatic mission supported by Indian nationalists that was indeed designed to convince Afghanistan to distance itself from the British Empire and attack British India, but it wasn't 'troops' except insofar as Oskar von Niedermayer and Werner Otto von Hentig were army officers. It passed through Persia, splitting itself up so as to minimise the chances of capture. While the British took the expedition seriously, and both Russian and British security forces attempted to intercept the mission, they managed to slip through the security cordon and enter Afghanistan.

The mission didn't fail because Niedermayer and Hentig started brewing alcohol. At one point they were successful in writing a draft of an Afghan-German treaty, but it collapsed on the basis of a combination of: clever playing off of different factions by the Afghan Emir Habibullah Khan, who realised there was no prospect of Germany following through on its commitments unless they were obviously winning the war; 2) the clear inability of Germany or the Ottoman Empire to send through the requested 20,000 troops to defend Afghanistan's border with Russia during any invasion of British India; 3) concerted British counter-espionage and diplomatic pressure; and 4) Central Powers setbacks in the Arabian Peninsula and Caucasus Campaign that made it obvious that no direct military help would be forthcoming.

The Germans left Kabul in the summer of 1916 once it was clear they wouldn't be successful in achieving their goals; alcohol had nothing to do with it.

I gotta stop trusting Oversimplified lol

There might be a tiny clue in the name.

[The Blaatschapen]

I gotta stop trusting Oversimplified lol

There might be a tiny clue in the name.

Probably the "simp" part of it...

[Hannoura Az-Zengi]

EMOTIONAL D A M A G E

[Mtwara]

During WW2, drawings for British machines - to be manufactured in the USA as part of lend-lease - all had to be redone from first-angle projection to third-angle projection; I understand that this took a few years to finish.

I remember being told that Britain and Australia changed during WWII, I didn’t realize it was such an effort.

First angle does my head in anyway, no-one should use it in the first place.

I understand some things like the Merlin engine were done very quickly, but parts for other things like certain tanks took a while.

To be fair although that fact is in my head, I can't find it online, so it might be in one of the books I have from designers who worked at that time. If I get a minute I'll see if I find it again.

[Australian rePublic]

In 990 AD, when toilets were nothing more than a piece of concrete above a pit, Edmund II, king of England, was using the toilet and killed by a viking who was hiding in the toilet pit

A Mediaeval king saw his donkey eating his figs and commented "five him some wine to wash them down". He died laughing at his own joke

Pizza dates back at least as far as Ancient Greece, when it was called "plakous". As tomato is native to the Americas, European didn't know about the until at least the 1500's. This means that 4/5 of the dish's existence, tomatoes weren't a pizza ingrediant (take that anyone who says that pineapple isn't an authentic ingrediant)

It is believed that Captain Cook was eaten by native Hawaiians, however this rumour is now widely believed to be false

Amy babies in Ancient Sparta born with a birth defect were thrown off a cliff. Apparently, there's now a pediatric hospital at the bottom of that cliff

The "Λ" on Spartan shields stood for "Laconia" which is the region where Sparta is located

[Australian rePublic]

Australia, NZ, Argentina, Chile, UK, Norway and France all have claims over Antarctica. In the 1940's the Antarctic Treaty was signed to prevent conflict over the continent, and it prevents any country from claiming sovereignty or establishing military bases in their Antarctic Claims for 100 years. However, the claims of Argentina, Chile and the UK overlap. Argentina found a loop hole to the no sovereignty clause by sending pregnant women to give birth there, but Chile one-upped them by sending couples to continue and birth there. As such, 11 babies are known to have been born in Antarctica

[The Archregimancy]

In 990 AD, when toilets were nothing more than a piece of concrete above a pit, Edmund II, king of England, was using the toilet and killed by a viking who was hiding in the toilet pit

The cause of death of Edmund II Ironside is unknown. The version of events that has him killed while sitting on a privy dates to a century after his death, and even then there are two different versions (stabbing vs shooting with a crossbow). Sources written within living memory of Edmund's death don't mention the cause at all, and you'd think they'd mention something quite so remarkable.

A Mediaeval king saw his donkey eating his figs and commented "five him some wine to wash them down". He died laughing at his own joke

This myth isn't attached to a 'medieval king', but rather to the 3rd century BC Greek philosopher Chrysippus - and even there we have two different versions of his death (though both involve wine).

Pizza dates back at least as far as Ancient Greece, when it was called "plakous". As tomato is native to the Americas, European didn't know about the until at least the 1500's. This means that 4/5 of the dish's existence, tomatoes weren't a pizza ingrediant (take that anyone who says that pineapple isn't an authentic ingrediant)

Flat breads flavoured with toppings date back to at least the Neolithic era - so thousands of years before Classical Greece. And while you're correct about tomatoes only reaching Europe as a result of European expansion to the Western Hemisphere, pizza bianca - Italian pizza without a tomato sauce - very much remains a thing.

It is believed that Captain Cook was eaten by native Hawaiians, however this rumour is now widely believed to be false

I don't know a single account that has James Cook eaten by Hawaiians - though he was certainly killed by Hawaiians. On the contrary, they treated his body in the same manner that they would a high-status chief. This involved removing internal organs and then baking the body in a sub-surface oven so that the flesh could be removed from the bones. This may be the source of the misunderstanding here. The bones were then preserved and venerated, with some of them returned to the British for burial at sea.

Amy babies in Ancient Sparta born with a birth defect were thrown off a cliff. Apparently, there's now a pediatric hospital at the bottom of that cliff

The story that babies with some sort of defect were abandoned at (rather than thrown off) Mount Taygetus isn't recorded before Plutarch (AD 46 – c.122) - centuries after the heyday of the Spartan state - and is today widely dismissed as a myth. I'm not familiar enough with the modern geography to comment on the absence or presence of a modern maternity hospital on or near the mountain, but it strikes me as unlikely given its popularity as a wilderness hiking area. Happy to be corrected on this point, though.

The "Λ" on Spartan shields stood for "Laconia" which is the region where Sparta is located

Almost. What you've missed is that the formal name for the state we now know as Sparta was Λακεδαίμων; 'Sparta' was simply the main settlement and de facto capital of Λακεδαίμων. So that lambda on a Spartan aspis refers to the official name of the state, which then also became the name of the region.

[The Blaatschapen]

The years 1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15,17,etc. are all odd parts of history.

The years 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,etc. are all even parts of history.

[The Archregimancy]

The years 1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15,17,etc. are all odd parts of history.

The years 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,etc. are all even parts of history.

Whereas these were all prime historical years:

1019 1021 1031 1033 1039 1049 1051 1061 1063 1069
1087 1091 1093 1097 1103 1109 1117 1123 1129 1151
1153 1163 1171 1181 1187 1193 1201 1213 1217 1223

[Amjedia]

Caligula loved his horse Incitatus so much. The horse was treated like a king. He had his own home and servants.
There is a story that Incitatus would have become a Consul but it didn't happen because Caligula was assassinated before appointing his beloved horse.

[Cydathenaeum]

The "Λ" on Spartan shields stood for "Laconia" which is the region where Sparta is located

Almost. What you've missed is that the formal name for the state we now know as Sparta was Λακεδαίμων; 'Sparta' was simply the main settlement and de facto capital of Λακεδαίμων. So that lambda on a Spartan aspis refers to the official name of the state, which then also became the name of the region.

Λάμβδα ἐπὶ ταῖς ἀσπίσιν οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι ἐπέγραφον, ὥσπερ οἱ Μεσσήιοι Μ. Εὔπολις · — ἐξεπλάγη γὰρ ἰδὼν στίλβοντα τὰ λάμβδα · οὕτως καὶ Θεόπομπος

Photii Patriarchae Lexicon

The sole attestation, none too helpful. Λακεδαίμων, Λακωνία, Λακωνική, Λακεδαιμόνιοι are all possibilities or, indeed, it may well mean something else altogether. My estimation is that it would lie with the last for the following reason: the Greeks when writing about each other speak of the body-politic being Λακεδαιμόνιοι, Ἀθηναῖοι or Βοιωτοί. The polis was considered to be comprised of its people rather than, as we speak today, a possession of territory. The best attestation I could think of is the historian Xenophon, as he was the most familiar with the Spartans and himself present at much of what he recounts: I was unable to find an attestation in any of the speeches where Λακεδαίμων was used in place of Λακεδαιμόνιοι and, you would assume, Xenophon being good friends of Agesilaus, would be well aware of how they thought of themselves. Likewise, in the other historians the demonym is always used, unless discussing the location.

For the unaware, there were of course several terms for Sparta and Spartans that house ambiguity to both a novice and a specialist alike. An army of Lacedaemonians may not necessarily have anyone from Sparta in it (or, perhaps, very few), as the word Lacedaemon referred to a sort of 'empire' consisting of several cities. What in the commonly imagination are Spartans, the Σπαρτιᾶται, are those who went through the agoge (and so became Ὅμοιοι), which should be best thought of as a sort of tribal initiation, if the parallels with the ephebeia of Athens—which we possess more information about—most famously discussed by Pierre Vidal-Naquet. The broader point is so: the image of the classical world that has been handed to us by the enlightenment is one which disguises a far more primitive and altogether alien world, even something as ubiquitous to us as the state.

[The Archregimancy]

Almost. What you've missed is that the formal name for the state we now know as Sparta was Λακεδαίμων; 'Sparta' was simply the main settlement and de facto capital of Λακεδαίμων. So that lambda on a Spartan aspis refers to the official name of the state, which then also became the name of the region.

Λάμβδα ἐπὶ ταῖς ἀσπίσιν οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι ἐπέγραφον, ὥσπερ οἱ Μεσσήιοι Μ. Εὔπολις · — ἐξεπλάγη γὰρ ἰδὼν στίλβοντα τὰ λάμβδα · οὕτως καὶ Θεόπομπος

Photii Patriarchae Lexicon

The sole attestation, none too helpful. Λακεδαίμων, Λακωνία, Λακωνική, Λακεδαιμόνιοι are all possibilities or, indeed, it may well mean something else altogether. My estimation is that it would lie with the last for the following reason: the Greeks when writing about each other speak of the body-politic being Λακεδαιμόνιοι, Ἀθηναῖοι or Βοιωτοί. The polis was considered to be comprised of its people rather than, as we speak today, a possession of territory. The best attestation I could think of is the historian Xenophon, as he was the most familiar with the Spartans and himself present at much of what he recounts: I was unable to find an attestation in any of the speeches where Λακεδαίμων was used in place of Λακεδαιμόνιοι and, you would assume, Xenophon being good friends of Agesilaus, would be well aware of how they thought of themselves. Likewise, in the other historians the demonym is always used, unless discussing the location.

For the unaware, there were of course several terms for Sparta and Spartans that house ambiguity to both a novice and a specialist alike. An army of Lacedaemonians may not necessarily have anyone from Sparta in it (or, perhaps, very few), as the word Lacedaemon referred to a sort of 'empire' consisting of several cities. What in the commonly imagination are Spartans, the Σπαρτιᾶται, are those who went through the agoge (and so became Ὅμοιοι), which should be best thought of as a sort of tribal initiation, if the parallels with the ephebeia of Athens—which we possess more information about—most famously discussed by Pierre Vidal-Naquet. The broader point is so: the image of the classical world that has been handed to us by the enlightenment is one which disguises a far more primitive and altogether alien world, even something as ubiquitous to us as the state.

All mostly fair; but I'm not sure the argument you're making is entirely clear.

Which of the following are you arguing in the first paragraph via the use of the quote from Photius?

1) That it's only in the erstwhile 9th-century Patriarch of Constantinople's scholarly lexicon that we find a reference to the use of a lambda on Spartan shields as a direct reference to Λακεδαίμων (or its variants)? Which of course is what the quote is specifically referring to.

2) It's only in Photius that we first find a reference to the specific form Λακεδαίμων (or immediate related grammatical forms)? In which case we potentially find ourselves in a rare case of my being historically out-pedanted.

The second paragraph seems to be making a separate though related valid point that I wouldn't quibble with, except to note that the manner in which you've constructed the post could be accidentally read as implying that Photius was a figure of the Enlightenment; no doubt a wholly inadvertent impact of quickly typing an NSG post.

[Cydathenaeum]

I do agree, not as clear as it should be.

The Photii Patriarchae Lexicon is in fact the only evidence that we have for the Λ on the shields at all!—sadly there is no evidence from Greek vases. It gives a fragment of Eupolis (later 5th cent.) and cites Theopompus (fl. 300), both authors considered lost. Nowhere is it said what it stood for. Gilbert Murray even had an amusing theory that it represented a raised hand of sorts. Λάκωνες is another possibility.

Stating Λακεδαίμων was used as the "formal name for the state" is, however, definitely wrong—or something we have no evidence for—, from contemporary literary evidence: where Sparta is used in translation, it is mostly οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι used in the Greek throughout history, comedy & oratory. It follows that there is little sense in the Spartans using it so.

[Australian rePublic]

In 990 AD, when toilets were nothing more than a piece of concrete above a pit, Edmund II, king of England, was using the toilet and killed by a viking who was hiding in the toilet pit

The cause of death of Edmund II Ironside is unknown. The version of events that has him killed while sitting on a privy dates to a century after his death, and even then there are two different versions (stabbing vs shooting with a crossbow). Sources written within living memory of Edmund's death don't mention the cause at all, and you'd think they'd mention something quite so remarkable.

A Mediaeval king saw his donkey eating his figs and commented "five him some wine to wash them down". He died laughing at his own joke

This myth isn't attached to a 'medieval king', but rather to the 3rd century BC Greek philosopher Chrysippus - and even there we have two different versions of his death (though both involve wine).

Pizza dates back at least as far as Ancient Greece, when it was called "plakous". As tomato is native to the Americas, European didn't know about the until at least the 1500's. This means that 4/5 of the dish's existence, tomatoes weren't a pizza ingrediant (take that anyone who says that pineapple isn't an authentic ingrediant)

Flat breads flavoured with toppings date back to at least the Neolithic era - so thousands of years before Classical Greece. And while you're correct about tomatoes only reaching Europe as a result of European expansion to the Western Hemisphere, pizza bianca - Italian pizza without a tomato sauce - very much remains a thing.

It is believed that Captain Cook was eaten by native Hawaiians, however this rumour is now widely believed to be false

I don't know a single account that has James Cook eaten by Hawaiians - though he was certainly killed by Hawaiians. On the contrary, they treated his body in the same manner that they would a high-status chief. This involved removing internal organs and then baking the body in a sub-surface oven so that the flesh could be removed from the bones. This may be the source of the misunderstanding here. The bones were then preserved and venerated, with some of them returned to the British for burial at sea.

Amy babies in Ancient Sparta born with a birth defect were thrown off a cliff. Apparently, there's now a pediatric hospital at the bottom of that cliff

The story that babies with some sort of defect were abandoned at (rather than thrown off) Mount Taygetus isn't recorded before Plutarch (AD 46 – c.122) - centuries after the heyday of the Spartan state - and is today widely dismissed as a myth. I'm not familiar enough with the modern geography to comment on the absence or presence of a modern maternity hospital on or near the mountain, but it strikes me as unlikely given its popularity as a wilderness hiking area. Happy to be corrected on this point, though.

The "Λ" on Spartan shields stood for "Laconia" which is the region where Sparta is located

Almost. What you've missed is that the formal name for the state we now know as Sparta was Λακεδαίμων; 'Sparta' was simply the main settlement and de facto capital of Λακεδαίμων. So that lambda on a Spartan aspis refers to the official name of the state, which then also became the name of the region.

Fascinating. Though "Laconia" now, and my grandmother, who was born and partly educated in Laconia, was under the impression that it was always called that

[Cydathenaeum]

I admit I was in error, as, having remembered a more powerful way to search through the Greek corpus, I can give a few examples where Λακεδαίμων plainly refers to the entity of the state (Thuc. 5.28, Plat. Minos 320, Isoc. 4 64) which date from the classical period, not later Roman or subsequent. Smyth only notes that the plural (and hence population) is sometimes used for cities.

However, on looking at almost every occurrence Λακεδαίμων in Herodotus, Thucydides & Xenophon, they are mostly in prepositional phrases indicating location. Later authors do seem to use it in the sense of a state more. Ἀθῆναι follows the same pattern.

I think my conclusion remains relatively safe.

[The Archregimancy]

I admit I was in error, as, having remembered a more powerful way to search through the Greek corpus, I can give a few examples where Λακεδαίμων plainly refers to the entity of the state (Thuc. 5.28, Plat. Minos 320, Isoc. 4 64) which date from the classical period, not later Roman or subsequent. Smyth only notes that the plural (and hence population) is sometimes used for cities.

However, on looking at almost every occurrence Λακεδαίμων in Herodotus, Thucydides & Xenophon, they are mostly in prepositional phrases indicating location. Later authors do seem to use it in the sense of a state more. Ἀθῆναι follows the same pattern.

I think my conclusion remains relatively safe.

I think we're probably broadly in agreement, and only really quibbling around some of the details, many of which seem to be arising from both of us quickly typing brief summaries for a popular internet forum.

You've acknowledged a slight lack of clarity and one error - both of which were good faith, and made from a position of knowledge - and in return I'll acknowledge that my 'So that lambda on a Spartan aspis refers to the official name of the state, which then also became the name of the region' was sloppily phrased. 'So that lambda on a Spartan aspis was traditionally believed to refer to the official name of the state, which then also became the name of the region' would probably have been better; still a bit lacking in detail (which may admittedly irritate a Classicist), but likely good enough for NSG.