Talk:Ernst Raven

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dating issue. We know in late July 61 Raven applied for papers from Richmond and he was ALREADY a SCG consul. If he had been appointed by SCG to CSA he would not have needed to apply in July. Therefore he was appointed to Texas/and or USA. That had to happen before Texas joined the CSA. Texas was independent from Feb 1 1861 to March 1, 1861 (probably not enough time for SCG to act). Rjensen 23:59, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Benjamin does not say he was already a SCG consul - only that he applied and the date that he applied on. NO OTHER DATES ARE GIVEN, and certainly not any before 1861. Your reasoning to use a pre-1861 date isn't supported in any historical documents, plus it's original research conducted by you - which is forbidden on Wikipedia. - MightyMo

P.S. Your dates are also wrong. Section 2 of the Texas Secession Ordinance said the day secession became effective was March 2nd. The provisional CSA government precleared acceptance of Texas on March 2nd should it secede by the referendum. There was no period of independence in between. "This ordinance shall be submitted to the people of Texas for their ratification or rejection, by the qualified voters, on the 23rd day of February, 1861, and unless rejected by a majority of the votes cast, shall take effect and be in force on and after the 2d day of March, A.D. 1861."

Try again: Why did Raven apply for an exequator in July 1861? Because he did not have one for the CSA. But he had one for Texas or for the USA (we don't know which). So he had his consulship BEFORE Texas joined the CSA. It's an empitical issue but I suggest he was consul in the 1850s. Rjensen 00:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Or, maybe he was simply a new appointment to fill the job in 1861. Raven is known to have lived in Austin in the late 1850's. The consul was in Galveston though according to the 1861 report by Benjamin. Regardless though, you still don't have a source to support your claims and original research is forbidden on Wikipedia. So it stays 1861 - the reported date by Benjamin - unless you can find a source showing otherwise. - MightyMo

Esquire, a title used for lawyers today, was a simple title to signify a gentleman of European origin in the 19th century. It doesn't show Raven was already consul in Galveston before 1861 (he likely couldn't have been - he lived in Austin in the late 1850's). And it doesn't have any special diplomatic status. Quit making things up Rjensen. If you don't have a source you can't make the claims under wikipedia's rules. - MightyMo

Contents 1 Tags 2 Galveston 3 Authority from the United States 4 BLP

[edit] Tags

According to Berwanger, this article misspells Raven's name; he uses "Ernest", which Raven undoubtedly adopted as a good English-speaking Texan. The conclusion about exequaturs is unsourced; WP:NOR requires a source for combining the two facts in the manner done here. (Berwanger's footnote is clearly irrelevant; it's to his direct quote from Benjamin's speech.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:05, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

I have rewritten the apologetic on the question of recognition; and Olmstead's newspaper ad concurs with the image of the printed Journals of the Confederate Congress in spelling Ernst. The journals alone are third-hand evidence (Raven's telegram → Judah P. Benjamin's report → the minutes of Congress → the transcription by the Government of the United States), whereas Berwanger has consulted Raven's actual telegram; but a telegraph error on this matter is not impossible. A caution is warranted, however. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Milledge Louis Bonham in The British Consuls in the Confederacy, Columbia University, 1911, p. 219.[1] uses "Ernest". Perhans this where Berwenger derived his usage. Bonham also give the port of Galveston rather than Texas as Raven's consular district. However, Bonham wrongly cites September 1861 as the date of Raven's request, apparently confusing the date of Benjamin's report to Congress on the matter with the date of the actual request, which Benjamin clearly cites as being in July. Bonham's error on the date puts into question his accuracy on Raven's first name and the extent of his consular district. Nicholas F 03:22, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Galveston

The claim that Raven's jurisdiction was restricted to Galveston, rather than extending to the whole of Texas, was sourced only by a broken electronic link. Prima facie the latter would be more likely; the German settlement in Texas was much further north, around New Braunfels, Texas. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Authority from the United States

The assertion that everybody but Raven had been a Consul at the time of secession is false; Benjamin quietly accepted several acting consuls before he made it a point of disagreement in May 1863. As for Berwnager knowledge of Raven's telegram, he did consult the Confederate archives, and the sentence in which he mentions Raven includes substantial information not derived from Bonham.

I would be content to leave this marked as trash; but I would prefer to make it a good article, not filled with claims for the Confederacy which it did not make for itself. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:39, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BLP

No reliable sources have been presented questioning Berwanger's research on this matter. Without such, attacks on his research are both original research and unsupported attacks on a living person. They can be removed on either ground. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)