Humanities desk
< May 18	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 20 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 19[edit]

Female history photographer[edit]

Am looking for the name of a female photographer at the time of the San Francisco Earthquake. Fallen white draught horses/drays are among her images... She gave up photography after that due to lack of money. Thanks, Julia Rossi (talk) 01:32, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about the "lack of money", for she appeared to continue to take photographs, but you may mean Edith Irvine. Her "Dead Horses" photograph can be found here [1]. ៛ Bielle (talk) 03:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's it! A double bonus, thank you so much Bielle! Julia Rossi (talk) 04:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are most welcome, Julia. ៛ Bielle (talk) 04:55, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sunken ship in the Thames[edit]

I was just recently told about a ship that was sunk in the Thames river, in or near London I think it was, which is still there today. According to what I was told, it's an American ship, is loaded with munitions, and the mast of the ship is still visible above the surface of the water. Does this ring any bells with anyone? Dismas|^(talk) 01:40, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further thought, it might have been Liverpool that they were referring to. We were talking about both London and Liverpool, so I might have them confused. Dismas|^(talk) 01:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SS Richard Montgomery. [2].—eric 02:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's got to be it! Thanks! Dismas|^(talk) 02:37, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the ship, ss richard montgomery —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.74.1.156 (talk) 14:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Muftis[edit]

How come in Somalia and Bangladesh they don't have muftis or grand muftis like Lebanon and Iran have ayatollahs and grand ayatollahs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.14.119.204 (talk) 02:42, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mufti and Sharia. Strawless (talk) 14:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Drugs in the Middle ages.[edit]

Is there any record or literature of drug experiences from the middle ages? Did any great artists or thinkers leave anything behind that detailed the use or stigma of drugs in that time? Who even used drugs back then, was it just some obscure hobby to pick the mushrooms from the cow fields and eat them or was this activity well known? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.232.250.222 (talk) 03:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from alcohol, I don't think there was such a concept as recreational drugs. You could check and see if St. Augustine gave any details about his lifestyle of debauchery before he converted, I'm sure alcohol, at least, was involved. The one group that immediately springs to mind is the Assassins, who may have used drugs like cannabis or hashish, or maybe alcohol, although plain old unaided fanaticism may have been enough for them. In Europe, sometimes eating something poisonous would make you go a little crazy for awhile; but in a case like ergotism it would also make your limbs gangrenous, so that wouldn't be much fun. I can't think of any philosophers or artists who wrote about recreational drug use; I can think of some who wrote about religious hallucinations, like Catherine of Siena, but anyone like that who starved themselves for God like she did was probably just anorexic, not on drugs. Or what about Joan of Arc? Was she just really pious, or on drugs? How could we tell the difference, really? Medieval medicine was pretty good, so medical treatises might be a good place to look for info about hallucinogens and other kinds of drugs. (Hopefully our article will be able to point you somewhere more useful!) Adam Bishop (talk) 06:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Norse warriors called Berserkers are likely to have used psychoactive drugs according to the article here[3] who were active around at the time of the early Middle Ages and not only. Julia Rossi (talk) 10:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's an interesting case from the late 14th century of a Parisian "Society of Smokers", satirized by the French composer Solage with his bizarre composition Fumeux fume par fumee. I wrote that article three years ago, before we were putting in inline cites, so I'd have to dig through my sources again, but exactly what they were smoking is a matter of some dispute. The singers go lower and lower and then get irretrievably lost towards the end of the music, and it's abundantly obvious from the music they're stoned on something. Tobacco was unknown in Europe in the 14th century. Hashish is one of the hypotheses on that piece. Antandrus (talk) 14:58, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it doesn't have to be Europe, not the middle ages and no written record, you might want to look at Coca. Some aphrodisiacs supplied by local herbalists are likely to have contained substances that today are considered drugs. Look at Atropa belladonna or Mandrake (plant) for instance. These toxic/poisonous plants contain psychoactive substances. Poppy seed pastries were known and liked in the middle ages, although one would have had to consume quite a lot of those for any drug effect, I guess. 71.236.23.111 (talk) 09:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on opium poppy indicates that people who consume two to four typical poppy seed bagels may test positive for narcotics. As a self-confessed lover of poppy seed strudel I request the presence of a lawyer before continuing with my answer :) --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 12:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note, of course, that when you say "Middle Ages" you seem to be thinking "European Middle Ages". Of course at the same time as that, there were all sorts of Native Americans who were taking peyote and in China they had opium production and in India they had hashish. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 15:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well technically the Middle Ages can refer only to Europe. Other cultures have other chronological divisions. Of course, you can refer to time periods that took place at the same time as the Middle Ages. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Muslims[edit]

I am new to this thing about Indian Muslims. Is there any Muslim population in Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh,West Bengal, Tripura and Tamil Nadu? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.14.119.204 (talk) 03:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article Islam in India and more specifically the section on Population statistics will help you with your question. C mon (talk) 06:43, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arab world under Iran[edit]

At what extent does Iran, which is not Arab, have influence in the politics of Sunni dominated, arab speaking countries ?

It is said that the Syrian regime is at least close to Iran, is this correct ?

The Hezbollah affects the politics of numerous countries : Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, Transjordania. At what point does the Shia connection come into play ?

It has been said that many of the Shia activists that have undermined the pro-American Iraq regime were at least sympathetic to Iran. True or false ?

It is accurate to say that in the Persian Gulf states, some of King Saud's major political opponents have been helped by Anti-American, pro-Iran groups ?

Would a Pax Iranica scenario be directly opposed to the projects of the pro-Western, European and US governements ?

69.157.239.231 (talk) 03:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be you're concentrating too much on Iran. Iran does have an influence, but there are a lot of people who hate America and hate Iran too. Osama for example. Or Saddam Hussein in his later years. (Who also hated each other.) The Arab world is a lot more complicated then Iran in one end, the US at the other... As for Pax Iranica vs other governments, again it's not so simple. For example, both Iran and the US support democracy when it gets them what they want. But if not, well then not so much... Nil Einne (talk) 12:15, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Syria is indeed close to Iran. When Saddam Hussein was at his most powerful, this was an alliance of neccessity, but asside from that, the ruling élites of Syria, who are mostly Alawites, have more in common with Shi'ite Iran than their Sunni neighbours, (or their Sunni people, for that matter). They also share in interest in a Shi'ite/Hezbollah Lebanon - with a client Iraq and a friendly Syria, Lebanon is now the only thing blocking Iran from the Mediterranean.

By Transjordania, I assume you mean Palestine? And out of that list, its only really Lebanon where they have political influence, although they have military influence throughout the region. As an aside, one of the most interesting effects of the '06 War was how Hezbollah is no longer seen as the Shi'ite militia, instead, many see them as an army of national liberation, and now experience support from beyond their traditional base.

The Persian Gulf states and Saudi Arabia really are a different kettle of fish. In Saudia, there are a great deal of anti-American groups, but very few pro-Iranian groups (except around the Persian Gulf, which has its own Shi'ite minority, I believe). Arab-Persian antipathy is as old as time itself, whereas Arab anti-Americanism is much newer. Most radical Arabs would rather have nothing to do with either group.

Aside from Israel, there are very few things that the West and Iran have to disagree about. Any argument that we oppose Iran due to its human rights record are negated by the fact we support much worse nations, Iran is a Jeffersonian Utopia compared to Saudi Arabia. 'Pax Iranica' would only be opposed to our projects if we chose to use our projects to oppose Iran. Ninebucks (talk) 17:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Bodhisattva[edit]

Where does the Mahayana teaching about the Bodhisattava come from? Is it the Lotus Sutra? And why then do Theravadins not accept the concept of a bodhisattva? Any help would be great, I'm doing some research into Buddhism :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.23.22.252 (talk) 10:40, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Bodhisattva, Theravana and Mahayana use the term differently. -- Q Chris (talk) 12:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I have looked at the Bodhisattva article but it doesn't say where the teachings about the Bodhisattva originate from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.1.226.232 (talk) 14:36, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Current riots in South Africa[edit]

How can South Africans identify who is not from South Africa? Do they have different facial features? And who are the rioters: black, white, everybody? 217.168.3.246 (talk) 13:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

South African nationality law and Identity document#South Africa. Strawless (talk) 14:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strawless you are useless. The question was about a rioting mob attacking people on the streets. How do they know whom to attack? Do the ask for the ID? 217.168.3.246 (talk) 14:43, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:Civil and WP:NPA - we try to keep things friendly here. You could have easily linked an online news article for Strawless's information. From reading this morning's and the weekend newspapers, I would say that most people in the townships know who are foreigners and who aren't (people tend to stick to their own kind which would make it easier to tell who is foreign). Although, according to recent reports, general lawlessness has replaced the xenophobia of last week. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 14:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

217, your first question wasn't about a mob or an attack, please read it again. One answer is official ID documents. Strawless (talk) 15:22, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are a wide variety of languages spoken in Southern Africa. Those spoken in Zimbabwe and other homelands of migrants to South Africa are different from the languages of South Africa. Also, there is a local patois called Tsotsitaal that is common in the black townships around Johannesburg. I would expect that migrants are identifiable by their speech. If they speak languages indigenous to South Africa, such as Tsotsitaal or Xhosa, they likely to speak imperfectly or to have an identifiable accent. Possibly South Africans can also identify migrants by their English accents, their styles of dress, or other cultural markers. It also likely that migrants have congregated in certain urban districts, where they would make easy targets. Marco polo (talk) 21:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I once asked a friend from Belfast, how during The Troubles did they tell if someone was protestant or catholic. He said it was usually because they knew their family background, but failing that their surname and slight differences in accent were usually sufficient. In Johannesburg, I would imagine name and language would be pretty conclusive evidence for the mob to decide who to attack next. Astronaut (talk) 08:31, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And how do the good folks in Belfast knew if a foreigner was catholic or protestant? 217.168.1.150 (talk) 12:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the people of Belfast didn't really care if a foreigner was Catholic or Protestant. This goes to show that the Troubles were not so much a religious conflict as an ethnic one. I am an American, and I visited Belfast during the Troubles. No one ever asked about my religion. Marco polo (talk) 18:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If this comic strip is anything to go by (yes, it's South African), they can't tell, although one guy's method is shown here. Deor (talk) 13:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MPs[edit]

how can I found out of my MP hads voted for the embrology bill? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.192.21 (talk) 19:04, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You'll find it on theyworkforyou.com/mp/. Xn4 19:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That, of course, assumes that this is the British Parliament we're talking about. 86, if it isn't, you'll have to talk about what country you are referring to. Paragon12321 (talk) 00:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hazarded a wild guess that 86 was asking about the British House of Commons simply because it's debating an enormously controversial Embryology Bill yesterday and today! Xn4 01:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

speak truth to power[edit]

what does the phrase "speak truth to power" mean and where did it originate?Smoore2040 (talk) 20:38, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase is self-explanatory. It means not to be a "yes man". Googling on "truth to power" yields 1,840,00 hits, the first of which looks OK and attributes the phrase to a Quaker, Milton Mayer, writing for the American Friends Service Committee in 1954. --Milkbreath (talk) 20:59, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 1954 pamphlet itself[4] says "Our title, Speak Truth to Power, taken from a charge given to Eighteenth Century Friends" This[5] says it is "an expression of the foundational Quaker belief that the light of understanding resides within each and every person." IIRC Noam Chomsky has criticized the phrase, saying - so what, power won't listen.John Z (talk) 21:38, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase is hardly self-explanatory, and after reading this I'm still wondering what it means.