Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

EdwardHeisler · 2018-03-18 16:01:18

I prefer the term settlements. Colony has such a negative meaning based on the unpleasant history of colonization on our planet. Some old school cold/hot warriors may prefer an imperial colonial empire controlled by Darth Vadar type Space Force troopers. Not me!

Terraformer · 2018-03-18 16:28:01

Whatever you call them, if we're actually colonising the place, they're colonies. If we're just sending people there on rotating tours of duty, their bases. Though some might not like that term, given the connotations of military bases.

louis · 2018-03-18 16:36:59

Settlements don't have that great a reputation either...used in WW2 and also some people don't like Israeli settlements, do they? Bases have a military connotation that we might want to avoid. Plantation...colony...yes they also have negative connotations. Outpost carries less negative connotations but suggests something rather small to me.

Why don't we come up with an alternative term?

RobertDyck · 2018-03-18 16:54:57

Wikipedia

The word "colony" comes from the Latin word colōnia. This in turn derives from the word colōnus, which means colonist but also implies a farmer. Cologne is an example of a settlement preserving this etymology. Other, less obvious settlements that began as Roman colonia include cities from Belgrade to York. A tell-tale sign of a settlement once being a Roman Colony is a city centre with a grid pattern.[4] The terminology is taken from architectural analogy, where a column pillar is beneath the (often stylized) head capital, which is also a biological analog of the body as subservient beneath the controlling head (with 'capital' coming from the Latin word caput, meaning 'head'). So colonies are not independently self-controlled, but rather are controlled from a separate entity that serves the capital function.
Roman colonies first appeared when the Romans conquered neighbouring Italic peoples. These were small farming settlements that appeared when the Romans had subdued an enemy in war. A colony could take many forms, as a trade outpost or a military base in enemy territory. Its original definition as a settlement created by people migrating from a central region to an outlying one became the modern definition.

North America was colonized by European powers in an attempt to acquire resources. Spanish sent conquistadors to steal by military force any wealth they could take from local inhabitants. Dutch established trading posts. English and French established colonies to harvest resources, either by farming/trapping/logging or trading with natives. These colonies were not intended to be self-governing, they were strictly a business venture intended to harvest maximum profit for the motherland/fatherland.

louis · 2018-03-18 17:05:31

Greek and Phoenician colonies were self governing.

Wikipedia says that "The relation between colony and mother-city, known literally as the metropolis, was viewed as one of mutual affection."

I think that is a very good outcome to aim for between Earth and its colony on Mars.

RobertDyck wrote:

Wikipedia
The word "colony" comes from the Latin word colōnia. This in turn derives from the word colōnus, which means colonist but also implies a farmer. Cologne is an example of a settlement preserving this etymology. Other, less obvious settlements that began as Roman colonia include cities from Belgrade to York. A tell-tale sign of a settlement once being a Roman Colony is a city centre with a grid pattern.[4] The terminology is taken from architectural analogy, where a column pillar is beneath the (often stylized) head capital, which is also a biological analog of the body as subservient beneath the controlling head (with 'capital' coming from the Latin word caput, meaning 'head'). So colonies are not independently self-controlled, but rather are controlled from a separate entity that serves the capital function.
Roman colonies first appeared when the Romans conquered neighbouring Italic peoples. These were small farming settlements that appeared when the Romans had subdued an enemy in war. A colony could take many forms, as a trade outpost or a military base in enemy territory. Its original definition as a settlement created by people migrating from a central region to an outlying one became the modern definition.
North America was colonized by European powers in an attempt to acquire resources. Spanish sent conquistadors to steal by military force any wealth they could take from local inhabitants. Dutch established trading posts. English and French established colonies to harvest resources, either by farming/trapping/logging or trading with natives. These colonies were not intended to be self-governing, they were strictly a business venture intended to harvest maximum profit for the motherland/fatherland.

IanM · 2018-03-18 17:32:32

"Settlement" seems the best IMO, as it doesn't conjure up any major negative historical occurrences to a white American mind (I'm aware those in other countries and of other races might feel differently) and in fact perhaps conjures up positive emotions of expansion and the frontier. "Colony" has a really loaded history but can be used with caution, "plantation" has a similarly loaded history without any benefit, "base" suggests something uncivilian, small, and impermanent, as does "outpost" and "camp". "City"/"town"/"village" are perfectly good terms to describe the size of the settlement, but say nothing of its relation to Earth.

louis · 2018-03-18 17:44:02

I like the "Earth 2.0" phrase. But it doesn't lend itself to easy discourse...

BTW I've always thought "Earth" is a bit of a crappy title for our planet...deploying the word we also use to describe the top layer of regolith! Confusing!! Triolith (as in "third rock from the Sun") would be better!

One thing about the Mars settlement is that it's going to be our first true settlement (ie moving into an area where there are no humans) on any large scale since about 20,000 years ago. That's exciting in itself.

RobertDyck · 2018-03-18 19:56:56

louis wrote:

BTW I've always thought "Earth" is a bit of a crappy title for our planet...deploying the word we also use to describe the top layer of regolith! Confusing!! Triolith (as in "third rock from the Sun") would be better!

"Terra" is the Latin name for Earth. It literally means "earth, ground".
"Tellus" is an older Latin name for Earth, meaning "land, territory; earth".
Wikipedia

In ancient Roman religion and myth, Tellus Mater or Terra Mater ("Mother Earth") is a goddess of the earth. Although Tellus and Terra are hardly distinguishable during the Imperial era, Tellus was the name of the original earth goddess in the religious practices of the Republic or earlier. The scholar Varro (1st century BC) lists Tellus as one of the di selecti, the twenty principal gods of Rome, and one of the twelve agricultural deities. She is regularly associated with Ceres in rituals pertaining to the earth and agricultural fertility.
...
The 4th-century AD Latin commentator Servius distinguishes between tellus and terra in usage. Terra, he says, is properly used of the elementum, earth as one of the four classical elements with air (Ventus), water (Aqua), and fire (Ignis). Tellus is the goddess, whose name can be substituted (ponimus ... pro) for her functional sphere the earth, just as the name Vulcanus is used for fire, Ceres for produce, and Liber for wine. Tellus thus refers to the guardian deity of Earth and by extension the globe itself. Tellus may be an aspect of the numen called Dea Dia by the Arval priests, or at least a close collaborator with her as "divinity of the clear sky."

Gaia - Greek name for Earth.
Wikipedia

In Greek mythology, Gaia (/ˈɡeɪ.ə/ or /ˈɡaɪ.ə/ from Ancient Greek Γαῖα, a poetical form of Γῆ Gē, "land" or "earth"), also spelled Gaea, is the personification of the Earth and one of the Greek primordial deities. Gaia is the ancestral mother of all life: the primal Mother Earth goddess. She is the immediate parent of Uranus (the sky), from whose sexual union she bore the Titans (themselves parents of many of the Olympian gods) and the Giants, and of Pontus (the sea), from whose union she bore the primordial sea gods. Her equivalent in the Roman pantheon was Terra.

SpaceNut · 2018-03-18 20:06:21

I just want to go and do not care what anyone will call it....

EdwardHeisler · 2018-03-18 20:44:58

SpaceNut wrote:

I just want to go and do not care what anyone will call it....

OK. So would Trumpycamps be acceptable? LOL

trump-announces-that-u-s-military-will-soon-have-a-space-force.jpg

louis · 2018-03-19 01:25:57

Magaville has a certain ring about it.

EdwardHeisler wrote:

SpaceNut wrote:
I just want to go and do not care what anyone will call it....
OK. So would Trumpycamps be acceptable? LOL
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--CbWR45ZJGk/ … -force.jpg

Oldfart1939 · 2018-03-19 01:58:43

Trumpytown, Magaville, whatever. It's going to initially be a research station like that at Antarctica.

louis · 2018-03-19 03:34:49

OK, I propose habitat .

I know it is used for smaller living quarters as well, but I think it would work well in context on Mars for the overall base/settlement.

The "first habitat on Mars is to be named Sagan City" . "Seven habitats have been established on Mars so far. The first and largest is called Sagan City."

I could see that catching on.

elderflower · 2018-03-19 04:26:00

Trumpy Mactrumpface.
I'm with Spacenut. I'm not bothered what they call it. Just get on with the project!

SpaceNut · 2018-03-19 19:39:10

The most recent images of the transport and lander for the moon seems promising but lets get Nasa out of the way. Have Nasa instead want multiple carriers for the destination as they are doing with the ISS and just have Nasa buy which ever one that they want on contracts for use.
Run down of list is quite short for any one particular company to do it all at this time.
Space x Dragon modified and heavy
ATK cygnus habitat or cargo and a launcher
Lockheed a Launcher (soon to be retired) for any cygnus or bigelow inflateable and possibly starliner
Boeing a Launcher and Starliner

So from the list no lunar lander, on surface habitat, no EDS or return stage once at the moons orbit....

Sure from the pieces we can build in orbit a craft for earth to moon use but thats after adding in the stages for EDs and return plus building a lunar lander and habitat for lunar use.

JohnX · 2018-03-26 10:43:36

A Mars base might be a research station or a basic, temporary, initial settlement before they come up with a better name.
Habitat will get abbreviated to Hab, and seems like a handy way to refer to a living accomodation

I agree with IanM & others - 'to settle', 'settlers', 'settlement' is probably the most descriptive and least likely to cause needless offence. Whatever, it's always possible to reclaim misunderstood terms by using them repeatedly, so people will associate them with what settlers are actually doing.

Louis, why the focus on Sagan? Sure he was a visionary, but one of many pathfinders on the long road to the planets. Kepler, Galileo, Goddard, Tsiolkovsky, Korolyev, Gagarin, Kennedy, Armstrong, Wells, Lowell, Zubrin... to name but a few.

kbd512 · 2018-03-26 13:58:55

How about Dawn? When we first establish out foothold on Mars, it will indeed be the dawn of a new age for humanity. It also seems like an appropriate name for our first colony.

On a lighter note, the new space suit design from SpaceX resembles the costumes worn by the Imperial scouts in Star Wars. It's probably just coincidental, but SpaceX likes to poke fun at just about everything, so the possibility still exists. Perhaps Darth Musk himself should personally oversee construction of the Mars Star to get us back on schedule. There's nothing like a "You've failed me for the last time!" moment to motivate people to work.

louis · 2018-03-26 14:14:35

Sagan's contribution is particularly relevant to Mars. He was the first scholar to suggest planetary engineering to create new habitable planets and set out a specific terraformation plan for Mars in the early 70s. I am sure others will be honoured but for me, Sagan is an obvious first choice - and I like the sound of it.

JohnX wrote:

A Mars base might be a research station or a basic, temporary, initial settlement before they come up with a better name.
Habitat will get abbreviated to Hab, and seems like a handy way to refer to a living accomodation
I agree with IanM & others - 'to settle', 'settlers', 'settlement' is probably the most descriptive and least likely to cause needless offence. Whatever, it's always possible to reclaim misunderstood terms by using them repeatedly, so people will associate them with what settlers are actually doing.
Louis, why the focus on Sagan? Sure he was a visionary, but one of many pathfinders on the long road to the planets. Kepler, Galileo, Goddard, Tsiolkovsky, Korolyev, Gagarin, Kennedy, Armstrong, Wells, Lowell, Zubrin... to name but a few.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-12-27 09:10:05

Discovery of new material is ‘giant leap’ towards clean energy production and colonisation of Mars
https://www.independent.co.uk/space/mar … 67697.html

Life on Mars closer to reality after British scientists make huge breakthrough
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/18493 … eakthrough
Moving to Mars is closer to reality after a breakthrough that would allow the creation of energy

On Mars there is possibly some dead Bacteria and there are dead Robotic Rovers, it is a new planet with nothing exploited.

In the use of the English language 'Settlement' can mean simply where humans live but it can also mean the arrival of a new human but alien culture to the original, economically it is the "final step in the transfer of ownership. A 'base' can imply Research or Army/Navy, the place where a country keeps its armed forces, the South Pole used to have military now its a nature reserve of sorts and has Research Laboratory where people study ice, study penguins, use giant telescopes to study neutrinos. The colony is typically the arrival of humans into territory who colonize an area, the area is now subject to a form of foreign rule, when an bunch of ants arrives we consider them a pest they are also a colony, it comes from the Latin colonia where Romans of the Empire would guard or tax ancient outposts that would be farms of Rome and maybe eventually grow into cities, there are no Native Martian people to exploit so maybe we don't need to worry so much about the name.

Names? Who ever builds the first town gets to name it, the town might be called New-Washington or Neo-Beijing or some twitter / x voted phrase like 'ElonMusk-ville' or maybe India gets there who knows, they are not ready yet but who knows what happens in the future? New-Mumbai or New-Hyderabad or New-Chennai or New-Patna or New-Kolkata.

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2023-12-27 09:17:22)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2018-03-18 16:01:18

Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#2 2018-03-18 16:28:01

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#3 2018-03-18 16:36:59

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#4 2018-03-18 16:54:57

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#5 2018-03-18 17:05:31

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#6 2018-03-18 17:32:32

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#7 2018-03-18 17:44:02

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#8 2018-03-18 19:56:56

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#9 2018-03-18 20:06:21

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#10 2018-03-18 20:44:58

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#11 2018-03-19 01:25:57

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#12 2018-03-19 01:58:43

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#13 2018-03-19 03:34:49

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#14 2018-03-19 04:26:00

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#15 2018-03-19 19:39:10

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#16 2018-03-26 10:43:36

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#17 2018-03-26 13:58:55

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#18 2018-03-26 14:14:35

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

#19 2023-12-27 09:10:05

Re: Should we establish Mars bases, settlements or a colonies?

Board footer